While the topic of NIL-induced conference re-alignments came up in another thread, I thought I would start a fresh, dedicated thread.
I have been brewing over the topic a bit and have decided to put my nickel down:
If the NIL continues in the direction it seems to be heading (programs bidding for the best players, offering “salaries” for the very good, non-marquis players) I prefer that Stanford step-down from the arms race and enter into more “ivy-league” type arrangement, aligning themselves with like-minded academically prioritized institutions.
I see the University’s top priority as being the advancement of scholarship, knowledge and innovation as well as the development of future leaders. In the spirit of Dean Fred, I see scholar athletes as a core part of this mission, and I cherish Stanford’s excellence in both the major sports (depending on year, but we compete) and the “minor” ones, and I support the weight Stanford continues to give to the scholar-athlete in admissions and generally as part of the University environment. However, paying athletes outright, which is what the top NIL-savvy programs are essentially doing, undermines the integrity of this primary university mission. It creates a privileged – possibly overtly rich - class of individuals whose purpose on campus exists outside of the university mission. While this slippery slope has been evolving for decades as the money involved in football success and the perks required to remain competitive for recruits continue to grow more lavish, NIL craziness makes it clear that it may soon be time to reset.
One thing I have loved over the years of being a Stanford fan is that I am rooting for student-athletes, people that have chosen a different, harder path than they could have, especially for the star athletes. I welcome a return to that in purer form – that the athletes on the field have opted out of the semi-pro form of college football now available to them, in favor of other priorities. I welcome competing against rivals that I also feel are like-minded, rather than the growing sense that we are competing against rivals playing a different kind of game, literally and metaphorically.
To be clear, I am not opposed to savvy players marketing themselves for what they can get. I am opposed to the institutional sponsorship of NIL deals that seems to be leading to the growing schism in the football (and presumably basketball) world.
I am also aware there may be thorny nuances, such as promising innovators being paid by companies while in school and drop-out entrepreneurs such as many famous company founders, but I don’t see these arguments as meaningfully comparable.
It will become clear in the next several years if the current NIL fever will become a feature of college sports, or if some significant course correction will urgently happen. If the new NIL world is the future world, I welcome the opportunity to reset.
As others have suggested, Northwestern, Duke, Wake Forrest, Vanderbilt could form the core of a new “New Ivy” league. I wonder if Cal, BYU, ?Norte Dame?, and perhaps a few other Pac-12 or Big-10 schools would untimately also opt to join such a league.
Curious what other’s think, and how one might justify the full NIL-arms race? I don’t think “we strive to be great at everything we do” does it. A university should not set a top priority as football greatness when that university has already achieved true “university” greatness and this new, alternate goal will create division among students and faculty and distraction to the core mission.
I have been brewing over the topic a bit and have decided to put my nickel down:
If the NIL continues in the direction it seems to be heading (programs bidding for the best players, offering “salaries” for the very good, non-marquis players) I prefer that Stanford step-down from the arms race and enter into more “ivy-league” type arrangement, aligning themselves with like-minded academically prioritized institutions.
I see the University’s top priority as being the advancement of scholarship, knowledge and innovation as well as the development of future leaders. In the spirit of Dean Fred, I see scholar athletes as a core part of this mission, and I cherish Stanford’s excellence in both the major sports (depending on year, but we compete) and the “minor” ones, and I support the weight Stanford continues to give to the scholar-athlete in admissions and generally as part of the University environment. However, paying athletes outright, which is what the top NIL-savvy programs are essentially doing, undermines the integrity of this primary university mission. It creates a privileged – possibly overtly rich - class of individuals whose purpose on campus exists outside of the university mission. While this slippery slope has been evolving for decades as the money involved in football success and the perks required to remain competitive for recruits continue to grow more lavish, NIL craziness makes it clear that it may soon be time to reset.
One thing I have loved over the years of being a Stanford fan is that I am rooting for student-athletes, people that have chosen a different, harder path than they could have, especially for the star athletes. I welcome a return to that in purer form – that the athletes on the field have opted out of the semi-pro form of college football now available to them, in favor of other priorities. I welcome competing against rivals that I also feel are like-minded, rather than the growing sense that we are competing against rivals playing a different kind of game, literally and metaphorically.
To be clear, I am not opposed to savvy players marketing themselves for what they can get. I am opposed to the institutional sponsorship of NIL deals that seems to be leading to the growing schism in the football (and presumably basketball) world.
I am also aware there may be thorny nuances, such as promising innovators being paid by companies while in school and drop-out entrepreneurs such as many famous company founders, but I don’t see these arguments as meaningfully comparable.
It will become clear in the next several years if the current NIL fever will become a feature of college sports, or if some significant course correction will urgently happen. If the new NIL world is the future world, I welcome the opportunity to reset.
As others have suggested, Northwestern, Duke, Wake Forrest, Vanderbilt could form the core of a new “New Ivy” league. I wonder if Cal, BYU, ?Norte Dame?, and perhaps a few other Pac-12 or Big-10 schools would untimately also opt to join such a league.
Curious what other’s think, and how one might justify the full NIL-arms race? I don’t think “we strive to be great at everything we do” does it. A university should not set a top priority as football greatness when that university has already achieved true “university” greatness and this new, alternate goal will create division among students and faculty and distraction to the core mission.
