07-31-2025, 07:31 PM
The new AD
07-31-2025, 07:36 PM
(07-31-2025, 07:31 PM)BobK Wrote: https://x.com/petethamel/status/19510992...93604?s=46
Outside the box pick, but he was a disaster at Nike.
Quote:Despite tumbling stock prices, with record losses, in 2024, Donahoe made the decision to cut 15% of all Nike employees in Oregon, all while his salary and bonuses remained in the top 0.1% of the top 1% of all CEOs in the United States.
BC
(07-31-2025, 07:31 PM)BobK Wrote: https://x.com/petethamel/status/19510992...93604?s=46
Outside the box pick, but he was a disaster at Nike.
Quote:Despite tumbling stock prices, with record losses, in 2024, Donahoe made the decision to cut 15% of all Nike employees in Oregon, all while his salary and bonuses remained in the top 0.1% of the top 1% of all CEOs in the United States.
BC
(07-31-2025, 07:36 PM)BostonCard Wrote:(07-31-2025, 07:31 PM)BobK Wrote: https://x.com/petethamel/status/19510992...93604?s=46
Outside the box pick, but he was a disaster at Nike.
Quote:Despite tumbling stock prices, with record losses, in 2024, Donahoe made the decision to cut 15% of all Nike employees in Oregon, all while his salary and bonuses remained in the top 0.1% of the top 1% of all CEOs in the United States.
BC
the reviews from his time at eBay are also not encouraging....
he's GSB '86
Eric
"the older we get the better we were"
(07-31-2025, 07:36 PM)BostonCard Wrote:(07-31-2025, 07:31 PM)BobK Wrote: https://x.com/petethamel/status/19510992...93604?s=46
Outside the box pick, but he was a disaster at Nike.
Quote:Despite tumbling stock prices, with record losses, in 2024, Donahoe made the decision to cut 15% of all Nike employees in Oregon, all while his salary and bonuses remained in the top 0.1% of the top 1% of all CEOs in the United States.
BC
the reviews from his time at eBay are also not encouraging....
he's GSB '86
Eric
"the older we get the better we were"
And a not very flattering Bloomberg profile from his time at Nike:
https://www.bloomberg.com/news/features/...e-s-tenure
I guess if post House we need to cut costs, he's got a lot of experience burying bodies?
https://www.bloomberg.com/news/features/...e-s-tenure
I guess if post House we need to cut costs, he's got a lot of experience burying bodies?
And a not very flattering Bloomberg profile from his time at Nike:
https://www.bloomberg.com/news/features/...e-s-tenure
I guess if post House we need to cut costs, he's got a lot of experience burying bodies?
https://www.bloomberg.com/news/features/...e-s-tenure
I guess if post House we need to cut costs, he's got a lot of experience burying bodies?
07-31-2025, 08:18 PM
Also, perhaps a nod to reality that “collegiate” athletics is a business that has little to do with college, but I can still rue the fact.
BC
BC
Also, perhaps a nod to reality that “collegiate” athletics is a business that has little to do with college, but I can still rue the fact.
BC
BC
07-31-2025, 08:47 PM
(07-31-2025, 08:18 PM)BostonCard Wrote: Also, perhaps a nod to reality that “collegiate” athletics is a business that has little to do with college, but I can still rue the fact.
BC
I think he is an excellent choice to lead the program into the new era of college athletics. The old, “handshake and a smile” model is gone. What is needed today is someone who can balance the budget, hire highly qualified talent and effectively represent the school at the highest levels of conference administration. I think Stanford has found a person who can take the program back to the top. Best wishes to Mr. Donahue….
(07-31-2025, 08:18 PM)BostonCard Wrote: Also, perhaps a nod to reality that “collegiate” athletics is a business that has little to do with college, but I can still rue the fact.
BC
I think he is an excellent choice to lead the program into the new era of college athletics. The old, “handshake and a smile” model is gone. What is needed today is someone who can balance the budget, hire highly qualified talent and effectively represent the school at the highest levels of conference administration. I think Stanford has found a person who can take the program back to the top. Best wishes to Mr. Donahue….
07-31-2025, 11:47 PM
Stanford Athletics press release:
https://gostanford.com/news/2025/07/31/j...-athletics
Best wishes to him, but I disagree that this is a good choice.
https://moneyweek.com/economy/people/joh...ike-uncool
Yikes! If he could make Nike uncool, just think of what he could do to Stanford football. The more I read about him, the worse I feel about the pick. This is a guy who failed catastrophically at his last position:
At best, we hope he learned from Nike. At worst, he’s someone who was a tone deaf leader, knows little about collegiate athletics or Stanford. I don’t think this was a good pick at all.
BC
https://gostanford.com/news/2025/07/31/j...-athletics
(07-31-2025, 08:47 PM)Giants Wrote: I think he is an excellent choice to lead the program into the new era of college athletics. The old, “handshake and a smile” model is gone. What is needed today is someone who can balance the budget, hire highly qualified talent and effectively represent the school at the highest levels of conference administration. I think Stanford has found a person who can take the program back to the top. Best wishes to Mr. Donahue….
Best wishes to him, but I disagree that this is a good choice.
https://moneyweek.com/economy/people/joh...ike-uncool
Quote:Who is John Donahoe, the man who made Nike uncool?
Nike’s 48-year success story has been put into question by John Donahoe, its outgoing CEO who knew nothing about Nike or its culture. What mistakes did he make?
Yikes! If he could make Nike uncool, just think of what he could do to Stanford football. The more I read about him, the worse I feel about the pick. This is a guy who failed catastrophically at his last position:
Quote:Donahoe made four big mistakes, says Mark Ritson in Marketing Week: he lost focus on the all-important product, went for short-term gains at the expense of long-term success and saw digital transformation as an end goal rather than merely one means among others for making sales. He was also one of those who “lost the plot” during Covid, telling us the world had changed forever.
At best, we hope he learned from Nike. At worst, he’s someone who was a tone deaf leader, knows little about collegiate athletics or Stanford. I don’t think this was a good pick at all.
BC
Stanford Athletics press release:
https://gostanford.com/news/2025/07/31/j...-athletics
Best wishes to him, but I disagree that this is a good choice.
https://moneyweek.com/economy/people/joh...ike-uncool
Yikes! If he could make Nike uncool, just think of what he could do to Stanford football. The more I read about him, the worse I feel about the pick. This is a guy who failed catastrophically at his last position:
At best, we hope he learned from Nike. At worst, he’s someone who was a tone deaf leader, knows little about collegiate athletics or Stanford. I don’t think this was a good pick at all.
BC
https://gostanford.com/news/2025/07/31/j...-athletics
(07-31-2025, 08:47 PM)Giants Wrote: I think he is an excellent choice to lead the program into the new era of college athletics. The old, “handshake and a smile” model is gone. What is needed today is someone who can balance the budget, hire highly qualified talent and effectively represent the school at the highest levels of conference administration. I think Stanford has found a person who can take the program back to the top. Best wishes to Mr. Donahue….
Best wishes to him, but I disagree that this is a good choice.
https://moneyweek.com/economy/people/joh...ike-uncool
Quote:Who is John Donahoe, the man who made Nike uncool?
Nike’s 48-year success story has been put into question by John Donahoe, its outgoing CEO who knew nothing about Nike or its culture. What mistakes did he make?
Yikes! If he could make Nike uncool, just think of what he could do to Stanford football. The more I read about him, the worse I feel about the pick. This is a guy who failed catastrophically at his last position:
Quote:Donahoe made four big mistakes, says Mark Ritson in Marketing Week: he lost focus on the all-important product, went for short-term gains at the expense of long-term success and saw digital transformation as an end goal rather than merely one means among others for making sales. He was also one of those who “lost the plot” during Covid, telling us the world had changed forever.
At best, we hope he learned from Nike. At worst, he’s someone who was a tone deaf leader, knows little about collegiate athletics or Stanford. I don’t think this was a good pick at all.
BC
08-01-2025, 05:40 AM
I trust Levin who has known Donahue for awhile. Of course maybe,sure hope not , it’s because Donahue lives close by
Like all hires we shall see
Like all hires we shall see
08-01-2025, 06:16 AM
I can think of another recent example of a sports organization that made an unconventional hire from Nike for a top job. Nico Harrison, the Dallas Mavericks GM, was hired straight out of Nike with no NBA coaching or management experience. Harrison is responsible for the worst trade in NBA (or maybe any sports) history and literally can't go out in public now in Dallas.
When it comes time for Donahue to hire a new coach, we're going to discover that he's in over his head, too. Even AD's with decades of experience in college sports struggle to make good hires. Why you would put someone with almost no experience in college sports in charge is beyond me.
I've been drifting away from Stanford sports for a while, and this hire is going to accelerate that process.
When it comes time for Donahue to hire a new coach, we're going to discover that he's in over his head, too. Even AD's with decades of experience in college sports struggle to make good hires. Why you would put someone with almost no experience in college sports in charge is beyond me.
I've been drifting away from Stanford sports for a while, and this hire is going to accelerate that process.
I can think of another recent example of a sports organization that made an unconventional hire from Nike for a top job. Nico Harrison, the Dallas Mavericks GM, was hired straight out of Nike with no NBA coaching or management experience. Harrison is responsible for the worst trade in NBA (or maybe any sports) history and literally can't go out in public now in Dallas.
When it comes time for Donahue to hire a new coach, we're going to discover that he's in over his head, too. Even AD's with decades of experience in college sports struggle to make good hires. Why you would put someone with almost no experience in college sports in charge is beyond me.
I've been drifting away from Stanford sports for a while, and this hire is going to accelerate that process.
When it comes time for Donahue to hire a new coach, we're going to discover that he's in over his head, too. Even AD's with decades of experience in college sports struggle to make good hires. Why you would put someone with almost no experience in college sports in charge is beyond me.
I've been drifting away from Stanford sports for a while, and this hire is going to accelerate that process.
You don't "learn" anything at this guy's age and stage of career. He's coming with with an agenda he sold to Levin. OK, show me the wins in the next few years.
On the bright side, the dude drove Nike (the anti-Stanford) into the ditch. Maybe he'll lead Stanford FB (the anti-Nike) into Bowlsby Land. But I wouldn't bet on it.
On the bright side, the dude drove Nike (the anti-Stanford) into the ditch. Maybe he'll lead Stanford FB (the anti-Nike) into Bowlsby Land. But I wouldn't bet on it.
Life is too short to waste on crap football.
You don't "learn" anything at this guy's age and stage of career. He's coming with with an agenda he sold to Levin. OK, show me the wins in the next few years.
On the bright side, the dude drove Nike (the anti-Stanford) into the ditch. Maybe he'll lead Stanford FB (the anti-Nike) into Bowlsby Land. But I wouldn't bet on it.
On the bright side, the dude drove Nike (the anti-Stanford) into the ditch. Maybe he'll lead Stanford FB (the anti-Nike) into Bowlsby Land. But I wouldn't bet on it.
Life is too short to waste on crap football.
08-01-2025, 08:49 AM
I was told by my first boss upon graduating from college that "we hire people to solve problems, that's it". Can this person solve problems?
p.s. My boss I learned years later after he has passed away had been a Master Sargent in the Marine Corps during WW2 and had participated in most if not all of the major battles in the pacific. Once I learned that I then understood why he as so calm and composed when the 'sh#t hit the fan' at work.
p.s. My boss I learned years later after he has passed away had been a Master Sargent in the Marine Corps during WW2 and had participated in most if not all of the major battles in the pacific. Once I learned that I then understood why he as so calm and composed when the 'sh#t hit the fan' at work.
I was told by my first boss upon graduating from college that "we hire people to solve problems, that's it". Can this person solve problems?
p.s. My boss I learned years later after he has passed away had been a Master Sargent in the Marine Corps during WW2 and had participated in most if not all of the major battles in the pacific. Once I learned that I then understood why he as so calm and composed when the 'sh#t hit the fan' at work.
p.s. My boss I learned years later after he has passed away had been a Master Sargent in the Marine Corps during WW2 and had participated in most if not all of the major battles in the pacific. Once I learned that I then understood why he as so calm and composed when the 'sh#t hit the fan' at work.
08-01-2025, 09:49 AM
Could this be more about his Rolodex for fundraising and recruiting, and perhaps mentoring Mr. Luck en route to Andrew actually calling the shots in Athletics? The guy seems like someone who would be incredibly well connected with deep pockets in the Valley…
08-01-2025, 10:02 AM
At age 65, he is not likely to be around as long as Leland, Bowlsby, or Muir. He can set the course in a new direction and keep the seat warm until Luck is ready or Stanford can hire somebody with athletic experience who commands a big salary. The latter is not likely to happen very soon with budget problems looming for the foreseeable future.
At age 65, he is not likely to be around as long as Leland, Bowlsby, or Muir. He can set the course in a new direction and keep the seat warm until Luck is ready or Stanford can hire somebody with athletic experience who commands a big salary. The latter is not likely to happen very soon with budget problems looming for the foreseeable future.
08-01-2025, 11:30 AM
(This post was last modified: 08-01-2025, 11:33 AM by Spiny_Norman.)
The #1 priority for the Athletic Department, which has been emphasized in all of the AD-related calls I have attended recently, is revenue-generation. Given his background at Bain, I wonder if Donohoe will be looking at unconventional revenue sources like PE firms. Could Stanford be the first school to offer an interest in its Athletics department in exchange for cash investment (which is not to say that it would be an attractive investment)? I think college athletics is headed that way. I am sure that firms are already building value models and pitch decks for college athletics investment.
As Maple Leaf said, can this guy solve problems? Right now, Stanford has a revenue problem. If that does not get fixed soon, Stanford will have a big cost problem.
As Maple Leaf said, can this guy solve problems? Right now, Stanford has a revenue problem. If that does not get fixed soon, Stanford will have a big cost problem.
"We have an unwritten rule around here not to do anything stupid."
-Casey Jacobsen, Feb 3, 2000
(This post was last modified: 08-01-2025, 11:33 AM by Spiny_Norman.)
The #1 priority for the Athletic Department, which has been emphasized in all of the AD-related calls I have attended recently, is revenue-generation. Given his background at Bain, I wonder if Donohoe will be looking at unconventional revenue sources like PE firms. Could Stanford be the first school to offer an interest in its Athletics department in exchange for cash investment (which is not to say that it would be an attractive investment)? I think college athletics is headed that way. I am sure that firms are already building value models and pitch decks for college athletics investment.
As Maple Leaf said, can this guy solve problems? Right now, Stanford has a revenue problem. If that does not get fixed soon, Stanford will have a big cost problem.
As Maple Leaf said, can this guy solve problems? Right now, Stanford has a revenue problem. If that does not get fixed soon, Stanford will have a big cost problem.
"We have an unwritten rule around here not to do anything stupid."
-Casey Jacobsen, Feb 3, 2000
08-01-2025, 12:00 PM
(08-01-2025, 09:49 AM)MVCard Wrote: Could this be more about his Rolodex for fundraising and recruiting, and perhaps mentoring Mr. Luck en route to Andrew actually calling the shots in Athletics? The guy seems like someone who would be incredibly well connected with deep pockets in the Valley…
Not sure how much mentoring Luck needs. Hopefully just a place holder for Coach Luck.
(08-01-2025, 09:49 AM)MVCard Wrote: Could this be more about his Rolodex for fundraising and recruiting, and perhaps mentoring Mr. Luck en route to Andrew actually calling the shots in Athletics? The guy seems like someone who would be incredibly well connected with deep pockets in the Valley…
Not sure how much mentoring Luck needs. Hopefully just a place holder for Coach Luck.
08-01-2025, 12:08 PM
(08-01-2025, 11:30 AM)Spiny_Norman Wrote: Could Stanford be the first school to offer an interest in its Athletics department in exchange for cash investment (which is not to say that it would be an attractive investment)? I think college athletics is headed that way. I am sure that firms are already building value models and pitch decks for college athletics investment.
Already happening. FSU was first
https://blogs.duanemorris.com/sportslaw/...ty-market/
https://www.sportspro.com/news/elevate-c...june-2025/
(08-01-2025, 11:30 AM)Spiny_Norman Wrote: Could Stanford be the first school to offer an interest in its Athletics department in exchange for cash investment (which is not to say that it would be an attractive investment)? I think college athletics is headed that way. I am sure that firms are already building value models and pitch decks for college athletics investment.
Already happening. FSU was first
https://blogs.duanemorris.com/sportslaw/...ty-market/
https://www.sportspro.com/news/elevate-c...june-2025/
(08-01-2025, 11:30 AM)Spiny_Norman Wrote: The #1 priority for the Athletic Department, which has been emphasized in all of the AD-related calls I have attended recently, is revenue-generation. Given his background at Bain, I wonder if Donohoe will be looking at unconventional revenue sources like PE firms. Could Stanford be the first school to offer an interest in its Athletics department in exchange for cash investment (which is not to say that it would be an attractive investment)? I think college athletics is headed that way. I am sure that firms are already building value models and pitch decks for college athletics investment.
As Maple Leaf said, can this guy solve problems? Right now, Stanford has a revenue problem. If that does not get fixed soon, Stanford will have a big cost problem.
Quote:The Big Ten Conference is taking preliminary bids from private equity firms despite past comments from commissioner Tony Petitti questioning the upside of involving institutional capital in college sports.
According to multiple people familiar with the situation, the conference previously retained investment bank Evercore, which solicited a first round of indicative offers from PE firms this week, just before a key deadline in the House v. NCAA antitrust lawsuit that could fundamentally change the economics of intercollegiate athletics.
“To better support its 18 member institutions, the conference is evaluating potential strategic partnerships in order to enhance the conference’s event, sponsorship and other ancillary business endeavors,” a Big Ten spokesperson told Sportico in an email, while declining to provide additional details. A representative from Evercore did not respond to a request for comment.
https://www.forbes.com/sites/joemoglia/2...-football/
Quote:College football program valuations: Ranking every Power 4 team by how much they’d sell for:
60. Stanford: $202 million
Average football revenue: $40.3 million
https://www.nytimes.com/athletic/6500596...ings-2025/
and from 2018
Quote:In late 2018, the sitting Pac-12 commissioner Larry Scott presented his bosses with a wild idea. He wanted to go “Shark Tank” and sell an equity stake in the Pac-12 Conference.
The conference members needed a cash infusion. Their media rights agreement was outdated and delivered each Pac-12 member $10 million-a-year less than their peers in the SEC and Big Ten.
The “Pac-12 NewCo” plan was introduced by Scott to the conference presidents and chancellors at their mid-November meeting and was subsequently discussed in a conference call in December of 2018.
Nine months later, Scott went public and said the conference was unable to find a suitable solution. He said of the presidents and chancellors: “They don’t want to do something with a private equity or financial firm.”
Turns out, there was a deal on the table. Just not one that the presidents and chancellors could agree they should take.
The Pac-12 was offered $1 billion for 15 percent equity in the conference by a private-equity firm, per sources involved in the process. The biggest pushback to making the deal came from two particular camps — USC and UCLA.
https://www.johncanzano.com/p/canzano-pa...n-1b-offer
Eric
"the older we get the better we were"
(08-01-2025, 11:30 AM)Spiny_Norman Wrote: The #1 priority for the Athletic Department, which has been emphasized in all of the AD-related calls I have attended recently, is revenue-generation. Given his background at Bain, I wonder if Donohoe will be looking at unconventional revenue sources like PE firms. Could Stanford be the first school to offer an interest in its Athletics department in exchange for cash investment (which is not to say that it would be an attractive investment)? I think college athletics is headed that way. I am sure that firms are already building value models and pitch decks for college athletics investment.
As Maple Leaf said, can this guy solve problems? Right now, Stanford has a revenue problem. If that does not get fixed soon, Stanford will have a big cost problem.
Quote:The Big Ten Conference is taking preliminary bids from private equity firms despite past comments from commissioner Tony Petitti questioning the upside of involving institutional capital in college sports.
According to multiple people familiar with the situation, the conference previously retained investment bank Evercore, which solicited a first round of indicative offers from PE firms this week, just before a key deadline in the House v. NCAA antitrust lawsuit that could fundamentally change the economics of intercollegiate athletics.
“To better support its 18 member institutions, the conference is evaluating potential strategic partnerships in order to enhance the conference’s event, sponsorship and other ancillary business endeavors,” a Big Ten spokesperson told Sportico in an email, while declining to provide additional details. A representative from Evercore did not respond to a request for comment.
https://www.forbes.com/sites/joemoglia/2...-football/
Quote:College football program valuations: Ranking every Power 4 team by how much they’d sell for:
60. Stanford: $202 million
Average football revenue: $40.3 million
https://www.nytimes.com/athletic/6500596...ings-2025/
and from 2018
Quote:In late 2018, the sitting Pac-12 commissioner Larry Scott presented his bosses with a wild idea. He wanted to go “Shark Tank” and sell an equity stake in the Pac-12 Conference.
The conference members needed a cash infusion. Their media rights agreement was outdated and delivered each Pac-12 member $10 million-a-year less than their peers in the SEC and Big Ten.
The “Pac-12 NewCo” plan was introduced by Scott to the conference presidents and chancellors at their mid-November meeting and was subsequently discussed in a conference call in December of 2018.
Nine months later, Scott went public and said the conference was unable to find a suitable solution. He said of the presidents and chancellors: “They don’t want to do something with a private equity or financial firm.”
Turns out, there was a deal on the table. Just not one that the presidents and chancellors could agree they should take.
The Pac-12 was offered $1 billion for 15 percent equity in the conference by a private-equity firm, per sources involved in the process. The biggest pushback to making the deal came from two particular camps — USC and UCLA.
https://www.johncanzano.com/p/canzano-pa...n-1b-offer
Eric
"the older we get the better we were"
I obviously have no idea if he will be good at his job and will hope for the best, but from a distance this is a terrible hire.
Stanford athletics is struggling to find its way in the radically-new and fast-changing environment of college sports, and we've hired a 65 year-old ex-consultant with a spotty and limited corporate history who basically is semi-retired and sits on boards for a living. And is clearly super wealthy so not exactly burning with hunger to grind hours to the extent needed, nor needs to work.
This commentary from a Fortune article about his Nike tenure seems relevant too: "But with Donahoe, [Nike] chose a CEO who lacked any deep knowledge about sneakers and sneaker culture, and no retail experience in stores, leading to the current disaster. He underestimated the importance of partners like Macy’s, DSW and Foot Locker in selling its running shoes. And as a former management consultant, cost-cutting proved to be his go-to tactic, but one that only worsened Nike’s problems."
Put another way, Stanford athletics has a top line problem (revenue), not an expense problem despite some bloat, and is trying to survive in a new, wild west environment. Yet we hired a retirement-age figurehead consultant to turn around the "company." We'll probably see some layoffs in the athletic department, but cutting-edge, outside-the-box and/or transformational changes? I doubt it. And what would he ever know about hiring coaches. I hope I'm wrong, but I kind of hate this hiring.
Stanford athletics is struggling to find its way in the radically-new and fast-changing environment of college sports, and we've hired a 65 year-old ex-consultant with a spotty and limited corporate history who basically is semi-retired and sits on boards for a living. And is clearly super wealthy so not exactly burning with hunger to grind hours to the extent needed, nor needs to work.
This commentary from a Fortune article about his Nike tenure seems relevant too: "But with Donahoe, [Nike] chose a CEO who lacked any deep knowledge about sneakers and sneaker culture, and no retail experience in stores, leading to the current disaster. He underestimated the importance of partners like Macy’s, DSW and Foot Locker in selling its running shoes. And as a former management consultant, cost-cutting proved to be his go-to tactic, but one that only worsened Nike’s problems."
Put another way, Stanford athletics has a top line problem (revenue), not an expense problem despite some bloat, and is trying to survive in a new, wild west environment. Yet we hired a retirement-age figurehead consultant to turn around the "company." We'll probably see some layoffs in the athletic department, but cutting-edge, outside-the-box and/or transformational changes? I doubt it. And what would he ever know about hiring coaches. I hope I'm wrong, but I kind of hate this hiring.
I obviously have no idea if he will be good at his job and will hope for the best, but from a distance this is a terrible hire.
Stanford athletics is struggling to find its way in the radically-new and fast-changing environment of college sports, and we've hired a 65 year-old ex-consultant with a spotty and limited corporate history who basically is semi-retired and sits on boards for a living. And is clearly super wealthy so not exactly burning with hunger to grind hours to the extent needed, nor needs to work.
This commentary from a Fortune article about his Nike tenure seems relevant too: "But with Donahoe, [Nike] chose a CEO who lacked any deep knowledge about sneakers and sneaker culture, and no retail experience in stores, leading to the current disaster. He underestimated the importance of partners like Macy’s, DSW and Foot Locker in selling its running shoes. And as a former management consultant, cost-cutting proved to be his go-to tactic, but one that only worsened Nike’s problems."
Put another way, Stanford athletics has a top line problem (revenue), not an expense problem despite some bloat, and is trying to survive in a new, wild west environment. Yet we hired a retirement-age figurehead consultant to turn around the "company." We'll probably see some layoffs in the athletic department, but cutting-edge, outside-the-box and/or transformational changes? I doubt it. And what would he ever know about hiring coaches. I hope I'm wrong, but I kind of hate this hiring.
Stanford athletics is struggling to find its way in the radically-new and fast-changing environment of college sports, and we've hired a 65 year-old ex-consultant with a spotty and limited corporate history who basically is semi-retired and sits on boards for a living. And is clearly super wealthy so not exactly burning with hunger to grind hours to the extent needed, nor needs to work.
This commentary from a Fortune article about his Nike tenure seems relevant too: "But with Donahoe, [Nike] chose a CEO who lacked any deep knowledge about sneakers and sneaker culture, and no retail experience in stores, leading to the current disaster. He underestimated the importance of partners like Macy’s, DSW and Foot Locker in selling its running shoes. And as a former management consultant, cost-cutting proved to be his go-to tactic, but one that only worsened Nike’s problems."
Put another way, Stanford athletics has a top line problem (revenue), not an expense problem despite some bloat, and is trying to survive in a new, wild west environment. Yet we hired a retirement-age figurehead consultant to turn around the "company." We'll probably see some layoffs in the athletic department, but cutting-edge, outside-the-box and/or transformational changes? I doubt it. And what would he ever know about hiring coaches. I hope I'm wrong, but I kind of hate this hiring.
08-01-2025, 01:39 PM
My hope is that the new AD has been hired to raise money, period. I have told by family member and friends who work at universities that most academic deans and directors of research departments/laboratories are to focus on fund raising and the management is left to associate deans, associate directors, executive vice presidents, etc.
I am sure (or I hope) that president and others in the administration have management/operations plan/structure established that ensures the new AD only does fund raising.
I have wondered if the GSB has either courses or case studies on management of athletic departments?
I am sure (or I hope) that president and others in the administration have management/operations plan/structure established that ensures the new AD only does fund raising.
I have wondered if the GSB has either courses or case studies on management of athletic departments?
My hope is that the new AD has been hired to raise money, period. I have told by family member and friends who work at universities that most academic deans and directors of research departments/laboratories are to focus on fund raising and the management is left to associate deans, associate directors, executive vice presidents, etc.
I am sure (or I hope) that president and others in the administration have management/operations plan/structure established that ensures the new AD only does fund raising.
I have wondered if the GSB has either courses or case studies on management of athletic departments?
I am sure (or I hope) that president and others in the administration have management/operations plan/structure established that ensures the new AD only does fund raising.
I have wondered if the GSB has either courses or case studies on management of athletic departments?
« Next Oldest | Next Newest »