12-18-2025, 05:05 PM
Somfai just ranked the 9th best freshman in WBB.
https://www.espn.com/womens-college-bask...-2025-2026
https://www.espn.com/womens-college-bask...-2025-2026
Put a glide in your stride and a dip in your hip.
WBB 2025-2026 season
Put a glide in your stride and a dip in your hip.
Somfai just ranked the 9th best freshman in WBB.
https://www.espn.com/womens-college-bask...-2025-2026
https://www.espn.com/womens-college-bask...-2025-2026
Put a glide in your stride and a dip in your hip.
12-20-2025, 08:21 AM
https://www.sfchronicle.com/sports/colle...218954.php
Anyone read this in the chronicle and have thoughts? Why would the payments be taking so long to get to the players? Curious as someone who had donated to Lifetime Cardinal for WBB in years past before the house settlement.
Anyone read this in the chronicle and have thoughts? Why would the payments be taking so long to get to the players? Curious as someone who had donated to Lifetime Cardinal for WBB in years past before the house settlement.
https://www.sfchronicle.com/sports/colle...218954.php
Anyone read this in the chronicle and have thoughts? Why would the payments be taking so long to get to the players? Curious as someone who had donated to Lifetime Cardinal for WBB in years past before the house settlement.
Anyone read this in the chronicle and have thoughts? Why would the payments be taking so long to get to the players? Curious as someone who had donated to Lifetime Cardinal for WBB in years past before the house settlement.
12-20-2025, 08:34 AM
Talking to an even more contributor something is missing. I do respect or the writer however
12-20-2025, 01:56 PM
Gift link to the same article was provided on the Cal wbb board if anyone is interested in reading who is not subscribed.
https://bearinsider.com/forums/4/topics/131939
https://bearinsider.com/forums/4/topics/131939
Gift link to the same article was provided on the Cal wbb board if anyone is interested in reading who is not subscribed.
https://bearinsider.com/forums/4/topics/131939
https://bearinsider.com/forums/4/topics/131939
Not that it's all that meaningful, but the Card bounced back in the AP poll this week, from NO votes last week to 21 this week. That's what two good wins can do.
And surprised that no one has commented on this, but more ACC POW honors last week -- Courtney Ogden co-player of the week and Lara Somfai the rookie POW (2nd time this year for Lara).
And surprised that no one has commented on this, but more ACC POW honors last week -- Courtney Ogden co-player of the week and Lara Somfai the rookie POW (2nd time this year for Lara).
Not that it's all that meaningful, but the Card bounced back in the AP poll this week, from NO votes last week to 21 this week. That's what two good wins can do.
And surprised that no one has commented on this, but more ACC POW honors last week -- Courtney Ogden co-player of the week and Lara Somfai the rookie POW (2nd time this year for Lara).
And surprised that no one has commented on this, but more ACC POW honors last week -- Courtney Ogden co-player of the week and Lara Somfai the rookie POW (2nd time this year for Lara).
12-22-2025, 02:31 PM
(12-22-2025, 02:28 PM)WBB fan Wrote: Not that it's all that meaningful, but the Card bounced back in the AP poll this week, from NO votes last week to 21 this week. That's what two good wins can do.
And surprised that no one has commented on this, but more ACC POW honors last week -- Courtney Ogden co-player of the week and Lara Somfai the rookie POW (2nd time this year for Lara).
Well deserved honors.
Put a glide in your stride and a dip in your hip.
(12-22-2025, 02:28 PM)WBB fan Wrote: Not that it's all that meaningful, but the Card bounced back in the AP poll this week, from NO votes last week to 21 this week. That's what two good wins can do.
And surprised that no one has commented on this, but more ACC POW honors last week -- Courtney Ogden co-player of the week and Lara Somfai the rookie POW (2nd time this year for Lara).
Well deserved honors.
Put a glide in your stride and a dip in your hip.
12-22-2025, 02:56 PM
(12-22-2025, 02:31 PM)martyup Wrote:(12-22-2025, 02:28 PM)WBB fan Wrote: Not that it's all that meaningful, but the Card bounced back in the AP poll this week, from NO votes last week to 21 this week. That's what two good wins can do.
And surprised that no one has commented on this, but more ACC POW honors last week -- Courtney Ogden co-player of the week and Lara Somfai the rookie POW (2nd time this year for Lara).
Well deserved honors.
Indeed. On top of that, having beaten UW, WSU and Gonzaga, we pretty much own the state of Washington - bow down!
(12-22-2025, 02:31 PM)martyup Wrote:(12-22-2025, 02:28 PM)WBB fan Wrote: Not that it's all that meaningful, but the Card bounced back in the AP poll this week, from NO votes last week to 21 this week. That's what two good wins can do.
And surprised that no one has commented on this, but more ACC POW honors last week -- Courtney Ogden co-player of the week and Lara Somfai the rookie POW (2nd time this year for Lara).
Well deserved honors.
Indeed. On top of that, having beaten UW, WSU and Gonzaga, we pretty much own the state of Washington - bow down!
12-22-2025, 06:06 PM
(12-20-2025, 08:21 AM)Card10Fan Wrote: https://www.sfchronicle.com/sports/colle...218954.php
Anyone read this in the chronicle and have thoughts? Why would the payments be taking so long to get to the players? Curious as someone who had donated to Lifetime Cardinal for WBB in years past before the house settlement.
"we don't want anyone coming to stanford for the money" - kate paye.
imo arrogant and clueless. is kate working for free for the privilege of coaching the smartest students? do stanford grad students forgo stipends for the privilege of studying at a great school? do stanford professors work for free? ridiculous. what hypocrisy!
sure, stanford doesn't pay the football coach 12 million; but they do pay 6 million more or less. stanford pays presidents, provosts, athletic directors, coaches reputable salaries. but athletes should come just for the education?!?!? yes, maybe stanford pays 2/3 of what an lsu might pay. but zero so far? zero?
what a recipe for mediocrity!
the reveal that zero funds have gone to wbb players so far makes it a bit clearer why top players have transferred out.
(12-20-2025, 08:21 AM)Card10Fan Wrote: https://www.sfchronicle.com/sports/colle...218954.php
Anyone read this in the chronicle and have thoughts? Why would the payments be taking so long to get to the players? Curious as someone who had donated to Lifetime Cardinal for WBB in years past before the house settlement.
"we don't want anyone coming to stanford for the money" - kate paye.
imo arrogant and clueless. is kate working for free for the privilege of coaching the smartest students? do stanford grad students forgo stipends for the privilege of studying at a great school? do stanford professors work for free? ridiculous. what hypocrisy!
sure, stanford doesn't pay the football coach 12 million; but they do pay 6 million more or less. stanford pays presidents, provosts, athletic directors, coaches reputable salaries. but athletes should come just for the education?!?!? yes, maybe stanford pays 2/3 of what an lsu might pay. but zero so far? zero?
what a recipe for mediocrity!
the reveal that zero funds have gone to wbb players so far makes it a bit clearer why top players have transferred out.
12-22-2025, 06:26 PM
(12-22-2025, 06:06 PM)jonnyss Wrote:(12-20-2025, 08:21 AM)Card10Fan Wrote: https://www.sfchronicle.com/sports/colle...218954.php
Anyone read this in the chronicle and have thoughts? Why would the payments be taking so long to get to the players? Curious as someone who had donated to Lifetime Cardinal for WBB in years past before the house settlement.
"we don't want anyone coming to stanford for the money" - kate paye.
imo arrogant and clueless. is kate working for free for the privilege of coaching the smartest students? do stanford grad students forgo stipends for the privilege of studying at a great school? do stanford professors work for free? ridiculous. what hypocrisy!
sure, stanford doesn't pay the football coach 12 million; but they do pay 6 million more or less. stanford pays presidents, provosts, athletic directors, coaches reputable salaries. but athletes should come just for the education?!?!? yes, maybe stanford pays 2/3 of what an lsu might pay. but zero so far? zero?
what a recipe for mediocrity!
the reveal that zero funds have gone to wbb players so far makes it a bit clearer why top players have transferred out.
The last time a "top player" transferred out schools were prohibited by law from paying players, so that had nothing to do with it. Let's not overstate things.
And the point Kate is making is that we're never going to be the school that simply wins the $ race, nor should we. But I believe we are working to be competitive with offers candidates get elsewhere. But the pitch will continue to be "why Stanford", the same way the pitch to go to UConn is "why Geno."
(12-22-2025, 06:06 PM)jonnyss Wrote:(12-20-2025, 08:21 AM)Card10Fan Wrote: https://www.sfchronicle.com/sports/colle...218954.php
Anyone read this in the chronicle and have thoughts? Why would the payments be taking so long to get to the players? Curious as someone who had donated to Lifetime Cardinal for WBB in years past before the house settlement.
"we don't want anyone coming to stanford for the money" - kate paye.
imo arrogant and clueless. is kate working for free for the privilege of coaching the smartest students? do stanford grad students forgo stipends for the privilege of studying at a great school? do stanford professors work for free? ridiculous. what hypocrisy!
sure, stanford doesn't pay the football coach 12 million; but they do pay 6 million more or less. stanford pays presidents, provosts, athletic directors, coaches reputable salaries. but athletes should come just for the education?!?!? yes, maybe stanford pays 2/3 of what an lsu might pay. but zero so far? zero?
what a recipe for mediocrity!
the reveal that zero funds have gone to wbb players so far makes it a bit clearer why top players have transferred out.
The last time a "top player" transferred out schools were prohibited by law from paying players, so that had nothing to do with it. Let's not overstate things.
And the point Kate is making is that we're never going to be the school that simply wins the $ race, nor should we. But I believe we are working to be competitive with offers candidates get elsewhere. But the pitch will continue to be "why Stanford", the same way the pitch to go to UConn is "why Geno."
12-22-2025, 11:18 PM
Wow, on Saturday Louisville destroyed Tennessee 89-65. Louisville had 20 turnovers against Tennessee's pressure. But they outrebounded Tennessee 59-37. Louisville also has defeated ranked ACC foe North Carolina. The Cardinals look tough, maybe the best team currently in the ACC. At least Stanford plays them at home.
"We have an unwritten rule around here not to do anything stupid."
-Casey Jacobsen, Feb 3, 2000
Wow, on Saturday Louisville destroyed Tennessee 89-65. Louisville had 20 turnovers against Tennessee's pressure. But they outrebounded Tennessee 59-37. Louisville also has defeated ranked ACC foe North Carolina. The Cardinals look tough, maybe the best team currently in the ACC. At least Stanford plays them at home.
"We have an unwritten rule around here not to do anything stupid."
-Casey Jacobsen, Feb 3, 2000
12-22-2025, 11:25 PM
(12-22-2025, 10:08 PM)BobK Wrote: Stanford is paying WBB all I doubt but yes paying
It was my understanding that women's basketball is being paid by the Cardinal collective this year and Stanford will take over the NIL payments as part of the 20 million dollar university wide NIL for women's hoops next year. Women's hoops will get a percentage of the total next year. But the players are currently being paid, it's just coming from a different entity now. The amount and source will probably change next year.
Cheers,
Pete F.
(12-22-2025, 10:08 PM)BobK Wrote: Stanford is paying WBB all I doubt but yes paying
It was my understanding that women's basketball is being paid by the Cardinal collective this year and Stanford will take over the NIL payments as part of the 20 million dollar university wide NIL for women's hoops next year. Women's hoops will get a percentage of the total next year. But the players are currently being paid, it's just coming from a different entity now. The amount and source will probably change next year.
Cheers,
Pete F.
12-23-2025, 12:56 AM
Pete,
I think you are conflating two separate things. The ~$20 million pot represents the amount schools can pay players directly as part of the House settlement. It is not meant to replace money that athletes can negotiate with third parties for use of their name, image, and likeness (NIL). In theory, the NIL money is supposed to represent “true” NIL, where players are paid fair market value (FMV) for actual use of their NIL for promotional purposes. For example, an athlete can sign with a national brand and be paid to film a commercial or be paid by a local brand for an endorsement (something like Palo Alto Burger Co., home of the Somfai burger). The NIL deals above a de minimis amount are supposed to be vetted by a clearinghouse to ensure that they are not a way to circumvent the $20 million House payments, but I think most people expect that the clearinghouse will be toothless. Already they’ve had to backtrack on collectives, which were initially going to be outlawed. So, I think we will see $20 million in House money payments plus however much of NIL money the school can coordinate that will have a fig leaf of vaguely fair “market value”.
BC
I think you are conflating two separate things. The ~$20 million pot represents the amount schools can pay players directly as part of the House settlement. It is not meant to replace money that athletes can negotiate with third parties for use of their name, image, and likeness (NIL). In theory, the NIL money is supposed to represent “true” NIL, where players are paid fair market value (FMV) for actual use of their NIL for promotional purposes. For example, an athlete can sign with a national brand and be paid to film a commercial or be paid by a local brand for an endorsement (something like Palo Alto Burger Co., home of the Somfai burger). The NIL deals above a de minimis amount are supposed to be vetted by a clearinghouse to ensure that they are not a way to circumvent the $20 million House payments, but I think most people expect that the clearinghouse will be toothless. Already they’ve had to backtrack on collectives, which were initially going to be outlawed. So, I think we will see $20 million in House money payments plus however much of NIL money the school can coordinate that will have a fig leaf of vaguely fair “market value”.
BC
Pete,
I think you are conflating two separate things. The ~$20 million pot represents the amount schools can pay players directly as part of the House settlement. It is not meant to replace money that athletes can negotiate with third parties for use of their name, image, and likeness (NIL). In theory, the NIL money is supposed to represent “true” NIL, where players are paid fair market value (FMV) for actual use of their NIL for promotional purposes. For example, an athlete can sign with a national brand and be paid to film a commercial or be paid by a local brand for an endorsement (something like Palo Alto Burger Co., home of the Somfai burger). The NIL deals above a de minimis amount are supposed to be vetted by a clearinghouse to ensure that they are not a way to circumvent the $20 million House payments, but I think most people expect that the clearinghouse will be toothless. Already they’ve had to backtrack on collectives, which were initially going to be outlawed. So, I think we will see $20 million in House money payments plus however much of NIL money the school can coordinate that will have a fig leaf of vaguely fair “market value”.
BC
I think you are conflating two separate things. The ~$20 million pot represents the amount schools can pay players directly as part of the House settlement. It is not meant to replace money that athletes can negotiate with third parties for use of their name, image, and likeness (NIL). In theory, the NIL money is supposed to represent “true” NIL, where players are paid fair market value (FMV) for actual use of their NIL for promotional purposes. For example, an athlete can sign with a national brand and be paid to film a commercial or be paid by a local brand for an endorsement (something like Palo Alto Burger Co., home of the Somfai burger). The NIL deals above a de minimis amount are supposed to be vetted by a clearinghouse to ensure that they are not a way to circumvent the $20 million House payments, but I think most people expect that the clearinghouse will be toothless. Already they’ve had to backtrack on collectives, which were initially going to be outlawed. So, I think we will see $20 million in House money payments plus however much of NIL money the school can coordinate that will have a fig leaf of vaguely fair “market value”.
BC
12-23-2025, 01:47 AM
I understand the difference. I think that Stanford has, relative to many schools, limited donor money for paying players (whether or not they are ostensibly connected to real market value for NIL through the collective). Since Stanford is supposedly waiting to pay WBB until next year, I think they are supplementing the money this year with Cardinal collective money. When WBB gets university money next year, I expect the NIL money to drop. Unless there is a notable jump in donations.
In the early phase of NIL there was not supposed to be coordination, then it was unclear, then there was no limit to it. I think Stanford was late to coordinating but I think are coordinating now. What I'm saying is, now it doesn't matter if it's NIL or from the university pool, WBB is getting paid this year and will continue getting paid next year. I think those who think that Stanford is ignoring the impact of getting the players paid are making incorrect assumptions about the current situation. I admit that I am doing some speculation here, but a few recent conversations with representatives from the collective lead me to believe that substantial coordination is happening regarding WBB players.
Cheers,
Pete F.
In the early phase of NIL there was not supposed to be coordination, then it was unclear, then there was no limit to it. I think Stanford was late to coordinating but I think are coordinating now. What I'm saying is, now it doesn't matter if it's NIL or from the university pool, WBB is getting paid this year and will continue getting paid next year. I think those who think that Stanford is ignoring the impact of getting the players paid are making incorrect assumptions about the current situation. I admit that I am doing some speculation here, but a few recent conversations with representatives from the collective lead me to believe that substantial coordination is happening regarding WBB players.
Cheers,
Pete F.
I understand the difference. I think that Stanford has, relative to many schools, limited donor money for paying players (whether or not they are ostensibly connected to real market value for NIL through the collective). Since Stanford is supposedly waiting to pay WBB until next year, I think they are supplementing the money this year with Cardinal collective money. When WBB gets university money next year, I expect the NIL money to drop. Unless there is a notable jump in donations.
In the early phase of NIL there was not supposed to be coordination, then it was unclear, then there was no limit to it. I think Stanford was late to coordinating but I think are coordinating now. What I'm saying is, now it doesn't matter if it's NIL or from the university pool, WBB is getting paid this year and will continue getting paid next year. I think those who think that Stanford is ignoring the impact of getting the players paid are making incorrect assumptions about the current situation. I admit that I am doing some speculation here, but a few recent conversations with representatives from the collective lead me to believe that substantial coordination is happening regarding WBB players.
Cheers,
Pete F.
In the early phase of NIL there was not supposed to be coordination, then it was unclear, then there was no limit to it. I think Stanford was late to coordinating but I think are coordinating now. What I'm saying is, now it doesn't matter if it's NIL or from the university pool, WBB is getting paid this year and will continue getting paid next year. I think those who think that Stanford is ignoring the impact of getting the players paid are making incorrect assumptions about the current situation. I admit that I am doing some speculation here, but a few recent conversations with representatives from the collective lead me to believe that substantial coordination is happening regarding WBB players.
Cheers,
Pete F.
12-23-2025, 09:37 AM
(12-23-2025, 01:47 AM)pefloresjr Wrote: I understand the difference. I think that Stanford has, relative to many schools, limited donor money for paying players (whether or not they are ostensibly connected to real market value for NIL through the collective). Since Stanford is supposedly waiting to pay WBB until next year, I think they are supplementing the money this year with Cardinal collective money. When WBB gets university money next year, I expect the NIL money to drop. Unless there is a notable jump in donations.
In the early phase of NIL there was not supposed to be coordination, then it was unclear, then there was no limit to it. I think Stanford was late to coordinating but I think are coordinating now. What I'm saying is, now it doesn't matter if it's NIL or from the university pool, WBB is getting paid this year and will continue getting paid next year. I think those who think that Stanford is ignoring the impact of getting the players paid are making incorrect assumptions about the current situation. I admit that I am doing some speculation here, but a few recent conversations with representatives from the collective lead me to believe that substantial coordination is happening regarding WBB players.
Cheers,
Pete F.
Thank you for sharing your thinking. It makes sense and my own mildly educated speculation confirms your thinking.
(12-23-2025, 01:47 AM)pefloresjr Wrote: I understand the difference. I think that Stanford has, relative to many schools, limited donor money for paying players (whether or not they are ostensibly connected to real market value for NIL through the collective). Since Stanford is supposedly waiting to pay WBB until next year, I think they are supplementing the money this year with Cardinal collective money. When WBB gets university money next year, I expect the NIL money to drop. Unless there is a notable jump in donations.
In the early phase of NIL there was not supposed to be coordination, then it was unclear, then there was no limit to it. I think Stanford was late to coordinating but I think are coordinating now. What I'm saying is, now it doesn't matter if it's NIL or from the university pool, WBB is getting paid this year and will continue getting paid next year. I think those who think that Stanford is ignoring the impact of getting the players paid are making incorrect assumptions about the current situation. I admit that I am doing some speculation here, but a few recent conversations with representatives from the collective lead me to believe that substantial coordination is happening regarding WBB players.
Cheers,
Pete F.
Thank you for sharing your thinking. It makes sense and my own mildly educated speculation confirms your thinking.
(12-22-2025, 06:26 PM)2006alum Wrote: And the point Kate is making is that we're never going to be the school that simply wins the $ race, nor should we. But I believe we are working to be competitive with offers candidates get elsewhere. But the pitch will continue to be "why Stanford", the same way the pitch to go to UConn is "why Geno."
can you perhaps offer the details of how we are "working to be competitive?" as i read the interviews in the linked sf chronicle article posted by cardfan10 (thanks!), the players have to this point received neither $ nor information, and at least one parent of a current player is troubled by the lack of transparency. cardfan asked for our reactions to the article, and mine is that we are falling way short, not even close to competitive. do you read the article differently?
i very much wish that kate had said, "we can't pay as much as some schools, but we are offering reasonable compensation that, paired with stanford's high academics and top preparation for life after basketball, will very much keep us competitive." to me, what she said sounded more like stanford's academics should be enough.l
regarding your assertion that the last time a top stanford player transferred out, there were no nil payments, iirc kiki iriafen transferred for 2024-25, same as nijaree canady, and canady made quite public that she received $1 million.
(12-22-2025, 06:26 PM)2006alum Wrote: And the point Kate is making is that we're never going to be the school that simply wins the $ race, nor should we. But I believe we are working to be competitive with offers candidates get elsewhere. But the pitch will continue to be "why Stanford", the same way the pitch to go to UConn is "why Geno."
can you perhaps offer the details of how we are "working to be competitive?" as i read the interviews in the linked sf chronicle article posted by cardfan10 (thanks!), the players have to this point received neither $ nor information, and at least one parent of a current player is troubled by the lack of transparency. cardfan asked for our reactions to the article, and mine is that we are falling way short, not even close to competitive. do you read the article differently?
i very much wish that kate had said, "we can't pay as much as some schools, but we are offering reasonable compensation that, paired with stanford's high academics and top preparation for life after basketball, will very much keep us competitive." to me, what she said sounded more like stanford's academics should be enough.l
regarding your assertion that the last time a top stanford player transferred out, there were no nil payments, iirc kiki iriafen transferred for 2024-25, same as nijaree canady, and canady made quite public that she received $1 million.
Reports are that Texas Tech has received a commitment from a 7’0” Nigerian. Reportedly they want her to join the team this season.
https://bleacherreport.com/articles/2534...commitment
https://bleacherreport.com/articles/2534...commitment
Reports are that Texas Tech has received a commitment from a 7’0” Nigerian. Reportedly they want her to join the team this season.
https://bleacherreport.com/articles/2534...commitment
https://bleacherreport.com/articles/2534...commitment
« Next Oldest | Next Newest »