[82lsju]

from an interview with the Daily

[b]JL:[/b] One thing I thought I should say something about is athletics.

Stanford has a really unique tradition in athletics. Not many schools compete with Harvard, Yale and MIT for academic excellence and compete on the playing field with Ohio State, UCLA and Texas — and we do at Stanford. It’s part of the fabric of the university, especially for Stanford alumni. The last time Stanford played in the Rose Bowl was the largest alumni gathering in the history of the University. I think everyone was very proud of this summer, when we had 59 students and alumni in the Paris Olympics, 

We are now facing some very significant challenges, from the professionalization of college athletics, moving to the ACC and financial challenges. So what we have to do is chart a Stanford path in this new landscape. That means, first and foremost, ensuring that student athletes at Stanford are Stanford students first. That’s why they come to Stanford rather than go somewhere else. It also means ensuring that athletics is financially sustainable (we’re going to need the help of our alumni to make sure that happens) and ensuring that we’re competitive. 

We do something at Stanford — we strive for excellence. That has been on my mind this quarter, and I look forward to working with everyone at Stanford to chart a successful course for our athletics program in the future.

https://stanforddaily.com/2024/12/15/qa-...jon-levin/

[82lsju]

from an interview with the Daily

[b]JL:[/b] One thing I thought I should say something about is athletics.

Stanford has a really unique tradition in athletics. Not many schools compete with Harvard, Yale and MIT for academic excellence and compete on the playing field with Ohio State, UCLA and Texas — and we do at Stanford. It’s part of the fabric of the university, especially for Stanford alumni. The last time Stanford played in the Rose Bowl was the largest alumni gathering in the history of the University. I think everyone was very proud of this summer, when we had 59 students and alumni in the Paris Olympics, 

We are now facing some very significant challenges, from the professionalization of college athletics, moving to the ACC and financial challenges. So what we have to do is chart a Stanford path in this new landscape. That means, first and foremost, ensuring that student athletes at Stanford are Stanford students first. That’s why they come to Stanford rather than go somewhere else. It also means ensuring that athletics is financially sustainable (we’re going to need the help of our alumni to make sure that happens) and ensuring that we’re competitive. 

We do something at Stanford — we strive for excellence. That has been on my mind this quarter, and I look forward to working with everyone at Stanford to chart a successful course for our athletics program in the future.

https://stanforddaily.com/2024/12/15/qa-...jon-levin/

[martyup]

[martyup]

[82lsju]

maybe, but did MTL ever talk about athletics???

[82lsju]

maybe, but did MTL ever talk about athletics???

[martyup]

maybe, but did MTL ever talk about athletics???

[martyup]

maybe, but did MTL ever talk about athletics???

[old spanish trail]

from an interview with the Daily

[b]JL:[/b] One thing I thought I should say something about is athletics.

Stanford has a really unique tradition in athletics. Not many schools compete with Harvard, Yale and MIT for academic excellence and compete on the playing field with Ohio State, UCLA and Texas — and we do at Stanford. It’s part of the fabric of the university, especially for Stanford alumni. The last time Stanford played in the Rose Bowl was the largest alumni gathering in the history of the University. I think everyone was very proud of this summer, when we had 59 students and alumni in the Paris Olympics, 

We are now facing some very significant challenges, from the professionalization of college athletics, moving to the ACC and financial challenges. So what we have to do is chart a Stanford path in this new landscape. That means, first and foremost, ensuring that student athletes at Stanford are Stanford students first. That’s why they come to Stanford rather than go somewhere else. It also means ensuring that athletics is financially sustainable (we’re going to need the help of our alumni to make sure that happens) and ensuring that we’re competitive. 

We do something at Stanford — we strive for excellence. That has been on my mind this quarter, and I look forward to working with everyone at Stanford to chart a successful course for our athletics program in the future.

https://stanforddaily.com/2024/12/15/qa-...jon-levin/

I like Levin's take on everything I've read, including this re athletics. He's refreshing.

[old spanish trail]

from an interview with the Daily

[b]JL:[/b] One thing I thought I should say something about is athletics.

Stanford has a really unique tradition in athletics. Not many schools compete with Harvard, Yale and MIT for academic excellence and compete on the playing field with Ohio State, UCLA and Texas — and we do at Stanford. It’s part of the fabric of the university, especially for Stanford alumni. The last time Stanford played in the Rose Bowl was the largest alumni gathering in the history of the University. I think everyone was very proud of this summer, when we had 59 students and alumni in the Paris Olympics, 

We are now facing some very significant challenges, from the professionalization of college athletics, moving to the ACC and financial challenges. So what we have to do is chart a Stanford path in this new landscape. That means, first and foremost, ensuring that student athletes at Stanford are Stanford students first. That’s why they come to Stanford rather than go somewhere else. It also means ensuring that athletics is financially sustainable (we’re going to need the help of our alumni to make sure that happens) and ensuring that we’re competitive. 

We do something at Stanford — we strive for excellence. That has been on my mind this quarter, and I look forward to working with everyone at Stanford to chart a successful course for our athletics program in the future.

https://stanforddaily.com/2024/12/15/qa-...jon-levin/

I like Levin's take on everything I've read, including this re athletics. He's refreshing.

[TriangleTree]

Thanks for posting, very good read.

What’s a bit disappointing is that he had to ask himself the question. That continues to be the bigger challenge.

[TriangleTree]

Thanks for posting, very good read.

What’s a bit disappointing is that he had to ask himself the question. That continues to be the bigger challenge.

[BostonCard]

Well, he sets out three metrics and we are failing all three:

1. first and foremost, ensuring that student athletes at Stanford are Stanford students first.
2. ensuring that athletics is financially sustainable
3. ensuring that we’re competitive

[BostonCard]

Well, he sets out three metrics and we are failing all three:

1. first and foremost, ensuring that student athletes at Stanford are Stanford students first.
2. ensuring that athletics is financially sustainable
3. ensuring that we’re competitive

[gailtate]

maybe, but did MTL ever talk about athletics???

MTL? In retrospect, a low bar. I hear what you're saying, but still.

[gailtate]

maybe, but did MTL ever talk about athletics???

MTL? In retrospect, a low bar. I hear what you're saying, but still.

[82lsju]

Well, he sets out three metrics and we are failing all three:

1. first and foremost, ensuring that student athletes at Stanford are Stanford students first.
2. ensuring that athletics is financially sustainable
3. ensuring that we’re competitive

but at least now they will hopefully measure the AD against those metrics...

[82lsju]

Well, he sets out three metrics and we are failing all three:

1. first and foremost, ensuring that student athletes at Stanford are Stanford students first.
2. ensuring that athletics is financially sustainable
3. ensuring that we’re competitive

but at least now they will hopefully measure the AD against those metrics...

[SkiBum80]

Was hiring ALuck to Levin's credit?
I'm not aware of any news indicating it is not to his credit.
To whoever's credit, it was a good move.
Because neither Muir nor Coach TT has shown they have the ability to turn around our football program, not without some sizable other help.
And yet I view calls to fire Muir or Coach TT as more likely to hurt the program further rather than turn it around.
Hence the move to bring in some new football-focused leadership a good idea.
Along with the explicit embrace of NIL, more transfer portal, and whatever else is relevant and significant in this changed landscape.

[SkiBum80]

Was hiring ALuck to Levin's credit?
I'm not aware of any news indicating it is not to his credit.
To whoever's credit, it was a good move.
Because neither Muir nor Coach TT has shown they have the ability to turn around our football program, not without some sizable other help.
And yet I view calls to fire Muir or Coach TT as more likely to hurt the program further rather than turn it around.
Hence the move to bring in some new football-focused leadership a good idea.
Along with the explicit embrace of NIL, more transfer portal, and whatever else is relevant and significant in this changed landscape.

[newguy]

i'm still grateful that he brought in Andrew Luck.

[newguy]

i'm still grateful that he brought in Andrew Luck.

[GoodGrief]

Was hiring ALuck to Levin's credit?
I'm not aware of any news indicating it is not to his credit.
To whoever's credit, it was a good move.
Because neither Muir nor Coach TT has shown they have the ability to turn around our football program, not without some sizable other help.
And yet I view calls to fire Muir or Coach TT as more likely to hurt the program further rather than turn it around.
Hence the move to bring in some new football-focused leadership a good idea.
Along with the explicit embrace of NIL, more transfer portal, and whatever else is relevant and significant in this changed landscape.

According to this story, "Luck said the idea came up "organically" a month ago in a conversation with president Jonathan Levin. Luck is the most decorated Stanford player of the past generation; he twice finished as the runner-up for the Voldemort Trophy and left the school after the 2011 season to become the No. 1 NFL draft pick. He recalled Levin suggesting to him: "Why don't you run football, Andrew?"
https://www.espn.com/college-football/st...ome-new-gm

So I'd definitely give credit to Jonathan Levin. So far, I'm impressed with our new President.

[GoodGrief]

Was hiring ALuck to Levin's credit?
I'm not aware of any news indicating it is not to his credit.
To whoever's credit, it was a good move.
Because neither Muir nor Coach TT has shown they have the ability to turn around our football program, not without some sizable other help.
And yet I view calls to fire Muir or Coach TT as more likely to hurt the program further rather than turn it around.
Hence the move to bring in some new football-focused leadership a good idea.
Along with the explicit embrace of NIL, more transfer portal, and whatever else is relevant and significant in this changed landscape.

According to this story, "Luck said the idea came up "organically" a month ago in a conversation with president Jonathan Levin. Luck is the most decorated Stanford player of the past generation; he twice finished as the runner-up for the Voldemort Trophy and left the school after the 2011 season to become the No. 1 NFL draft pick. He recalled Levin suggesting to him: "Why don't you run football, Andrew?"
https://www.espn.com/college-football/st...ome-new-gm

So I'd definitely give credit to Jonathan Levin. So far, I'm impressed with our new President.

[CompSci87]

Yes, would MTL even have "had a conversation" with a past Stanford football star shortly after taking over? Much less offer him a job.

[CompSci87]

Yes, would MTL even have "had a conversation" with a past Stanford football star shortly after taking over? Much less offer him a job.

[McKenwood]

Was hiring ALuck to Levin's credit?
I'm not aware of any news indicating it is not to his credit.
To whoever's credit, it was a good move.
Because neither Muir nor Coach TT has shown they have the ability to turn around our football program, not without some sizable other help.
And yet I view calls to fire Muir or Coach TT as more likely to hurt the program further rather than turn it around.
Hence the move to bring in some new football-focused leadership a good idea.
Along with the explicit embrace of NIL, more transfer portal, and whatever else is relevant and significant in this changed landscape.

According to this story, "Luck said the idea came up "organically" a month ago in a conversation with president Jonathan Levin. Luck is the most decorated Stanford player of the past generation; he twice finished as the runner-up for the Voldemort Trophy and left the school after the 2011 season to become the No. 1 NFL draft pick. He recalled Levin suggesting to him: "Why don't you run football, Andrew?"
https://www.espn.com/college-football/st...ome-new-gm

So I'd definitely give credit to Jonathan Levin. So far, I'm impressed with our new President.

Credit should go to President Levin. He made this call despite pushback from other people in the University. He recognized that the status quo was not sustainable.

Recently I heard about another tough decision Presient Levin made (not related to Athletics) and he pushed back on a very conservative recommendation his in-house legal group made. I like to hear this as Stanford has been run for too long by the general counsel's office.

[McKenwood]

Was hiring ALuck to Levin's credit?
I'm not aware of any news indicating it is not to his credit.
To whoever's credit, it was a good move.
Because neither Muir nor Coach TT has shown they have the ability to turn around our football program, not without some sizable other help.
And yet I view calls to fire Muir or Coach TT as more likely to hurt the program further rather than turn it around.
Hence the move to bring in some new football-focused leadership a good idea.
Along with the explicit embrace of NIL, more transfer portal, and whatever else is relevant and significant in this changed landscape.

According to this story, "Luck said the idea came up "organically" a month ago in a conversation with president Jonathan Levin. Luck is the most decorated Stanford player of the past generation; he twice finished as the runner-up for the Voldemort Trophy and left the school after the 2011 season to become the No. 1 NFL draft pick. He recalled Levin suggesting to him: "Why don't you run football, Andrew?"
https://www.espn.com/college-football/st...ome-new-gm

So I'd definitely give credit to Jonathan Levin. So far, I'm impressed with our new President.

Credit should go to President Levin. He made this call despite pushback from other people in the University. He recognized that the status quo was not sustainable.

Recently I heard about another tough decision Presient Levin made (not related to Athletics) and he pushed back on a very conservative recommendation his in-house legal group made. I like to hear this as Stanford has been run for too long by the general counsel's office.

[GoodGrief]

Was hiring ALuck to Levin's credit?
I'm not aware of any news indicating it is not to his credit.
To whoever's credit, it was a good move.
Because neither Muir nor Coach TT has shown they have the ability to turn around our football program, not without some sizable other help.
And yet I view calls to fire Muir or Coach TT as more likely to hurt the program further rather than turn it around.
Hence the move to bring in some new football-focused leadership a good idea.
Along with the explicit embrace of NIL, more transfer portal, and whatever else is relevant and significant in this changed landscape.

According to this story, "Luck said the idea came up "organically" a month ago in a conversation with president Jonathan Levin. Luck is the most decorated Stanford player of the past generation; he twice finished as the runner-up for the Voldemort Trophy and left the school after the 2011 season to become the No. 1 NFL draft pick. He recalled Levin suggesting to him: "Why don't you run football, Andrew?"
https://www.espn.com/college-football/st...ome-new-gm

So I'd definitely give credit to Jonathan Levin. So far, I'm impressed with our new President.

Credit should go to President Levin. He made this call despite pushback from other people in the University. He recognized that the status quo was not sustainable.

Recently I heard about another tough decision Presient Levin made (not related to Athletics) and he pushed back on a very conservative recommendation his in-house legal group made. I like to hear this as Stanford has been run for too long by the general counsel's office.

That’s encouraging to hear. Are you allowed to give us specifics on what that decision was?

[GoodGrief]

Was hiring ALuck to Levin's credit?
I'm not aware of any news indicating it is not to his credit.
To whoever's credit, it was a good move.
Because neither Muir nor Coach TT has shown they have the ability to turn around our football program, not without some sizable other help.
And yet I view calls to fire Muir or Coach TT as more likely to hurt the program further rather than turn it around.
Hence the move to bring in some new football-focused leadership a good idea.
Along with the explicit embrace of NIL, more transfer portal, and whatever else is relevant and significant in this changed landscape.

According to this story, "Luck said the idea came up "organically" a month ago in a conversation with president Jonathan Levin. Luck is the most decorated Stanford player of the past generation; he twice finished as the runner-up for the Voldemort Trophy and left the school after the 2011 season to become the No. 1 NFL draft pick. He recalled Levin suggesting to him: "Why don't you run football, Andrew?"
https://www.espn.com/college-football/st...ome-new-gm

So I'd definitely give credit to Jonathan Levin. So far, I'm impressed with our new President.

Credit should go to President Levin. He made this call despite pushback from other people in the University. He recognized that the status quo was not sustainable.

Recently I heard about another tough decision Presient Levin made (not related to Athletics) and he pushed back on a very conservative recommendation his in-house legal group made. I like to hear this as Stanford has been run for too long by the general counsel's office.

That’s encouraging to hear. Are you allowed to give us specifics on what that decision was?

[jonnyss]

maybe, but did MTL ever talk about athletics???

i believe mtl distributed some compelling images that were impressive at the time!        ;  ^  )

[jonnyss]

maybe, but did MTL ever talk about athletics???

i believe mtl distributed some compelling images that were impressive at the time!        ;  ^  )

[fullmetal]

I like to hear this as Stanford has been run for too long by the general counsel's office.

I think one difference between a Stanford leader and a non-Stanford leader is that a non-Stanford leader is primarily (reflexively!) focused on protecting the brand at all costs, whereas a Stanford leader is interested in doing the right thing, understanding that doing the right thing should be an integral part of the brand.

[fullmetal]

I like to hear this as Stanford has been run for too long by the general counsel's office.

I think one difference between a Stanford leader and a non-Stanford leader is that a non-Stanford leader is primarily (reflexively!) focused on protecting the brand at all costs, whereas a Stanford leader is interested in doing the right thing, understanding that doing the right thing should be an integral part of the brand.

[GK3]

I like to hear this as Stanford has been run for too long by the general counsel's office.

I think one difference between a Stanford leader and a non-Stanford leader is that a non-Stanford leader is primarily (reflexively!) focused on protecting the brand at all costs, whereas a Stanford leader is interested in doing the right thing, understanding that doing the right thing should be an integral part of the brand.

+1  Indeed!   The world is always changing and sometimes the changes are major and you either adapt or get left in the dust.  It appears we now have a leader who is willing to change and adapt.  A university is I think by its nature a fairly insular society and Stanford has always required athletes jump through the same application hoops as any other student.  Maybe it is time to consider making it easier.  Our competition certainly is.

[GK3]

I like to hear this as Stanford has been run for too long by the general counsel's office.

I think one difference between a Stanford leader and a non-Stanford leader is that a non-Stanford leader is primarily (reflexively!) focused on protecting the brand at all costs, whereas a Stanford leader is interested in doing the right thing, understanding that doing the right thing should be an integral part of the brand.

+1  Indeed!   The world is always changing and sometimes the changes are major and you either adapt or get left in the dust.  It appears we now have a leader who is willing to change and adapt.  A university is I think by its nature a fairly insular society and Stanford has always required athletes jump through the same application hoops as any other student.  Maybe it is time to consider making it easier.  Our competition certainly is.

[Mick]

Was hiring ALuck to Levin's credit?
I'm not aware of any news indicating it is not to his credit.
To whoever's credit, it was a good move.
Because neither Muir nor Coach TT has shown they have the ability to turn around our football program, not without some sizable other help.
And yet I view calls to fire Muir or Coach TT as more likely to hurt the program further rather than turn it around.
Hence the move to bring in some new football-focused leadership a good idea.
Along with the explicit embrace of NIL, more transfer portal, and whatever else is relevant and significant in this changed landscape.

According to this story, "Luck said the idea came up "organically" a month ago in a conversation with president Jonathan Levin. Luck is the most decorated Stanford player of the past generation; he twice finished as the runner-up for the Voldemort Trophy and left the school after the 2011 season to become the No. 1 NFL draft pick. He recalled Levin suggesting to him: "Why don't you run football, Andrew?"
https://www.espn.com/college-football/st...ome-new-gm

So I'd definitely give credit to Jonathan Levin. So far, I'm impressed with our new President.

Credit should go to President Levin. He made this call despite pushback from other people in the University. He recognized that the status quo was not sustainable.

Recently I heard about another tough decision Presient Levin made (not related to Athletics) and he pushed back on a very conservative recommendation his in-house legal group made. I like to hear this as Stanford has been run for too long by the general counsel's office.

+1

[Mick]

Was hiring ALuck to Levin's credit?
I'm not aware of any news indicating it is not to his credit.
To whoever's credit, it was a good move.
Because neither Muir nor Coach TT has shown they have the ability to turn around our football program, not without some sizable other help.
And yet I view calls to fire Muir or Coach TT as more likely to hurt the program further rather than turn it around.
Hence the move to bring in some new football-focused leadership a good idea.
Along with the explicit embrace of NIL, more transfer portal, and whatever else is relevant and significant in this changed landscape.

According to this story, "Luck said the idea came up "organically" a month ago in a conversation with president Jonathan Levin. Luck is the most decorated Stanford player of the past generation; he twice finished as the runner-up for the Voldemort Trophy and left the school after the 2011 season to become the No. 1 NFL draft pick. He recalled Levin suggesting to him: "Why don't you run football, Andrew?"
https://www.espn.com/college-football/st...ome-new-gm

So I'd definitely give credit to Jonathan Levin. So far, I'm impressed with our new President.

Credit should go to President Levin. He made this call despite pushback from other people in the University. He recognized that the status quo was not sustainable.

Recently I heard about another tough decision Presient Levin made (not related to Athletics) and he pushed back on a very conservative recommendation his in-house legal group made. I like to hear this as Stanford has been run for too long by the general counsel's office.

+1

[TonyLima]

maybe, but did MTL ever talk about athletics???

i believe mtl distributed some compelling images that were impressive at the time!        ;  ^  )

Zing!

[TonyLima]

maybe, but did MTL ever talk about athletics???

i believe mtl distributed some compelling images that were impressive at the time!        ;  ^  )

Zing!