[Mick]

That is interesting, but not really helpful for persuading the Stanford administration to prioritize football since there is no lack of demand to attend Stanford, even when the football team sucks.

I'm thinking about additional applications at the margin. Stanford's acceptance rate is around 3.9%, fifth in the country (more or less). Take a look at this application trend. Notice anything interesting, perhaps a sharp increase in applications when Harbaugh and Shaw's early years are factored in? The university had decent increases during Willingham's tenure as well, but a sharp increase when Harbaugh had the first winning season in nine years, and then a sharper increase when they went 12-1. The increases persisted until 2016, when the football team started to nose over.

You can also see the same effect between Bill Walsh's successful years in the late 1970s, through John Elway, then they went down (actually declined) during the Jack Elway/Dennis Green years, then rose sharply again when Walsh returned.
undergraduate-admissions-1950-2023.pdf

I know, I know. Correlation ain't causation, I read that somewhere. Maybe it's just a heck of a coincidence.

Here's the question: is it better for the University to have a mediocre football team, a good football team or a great football team? Particularly considering the comparatively minor investment in football (relative to the University's annual expenditures).

[Mick]

That is interesting, but not really helpful for persuading the Stanford administration to prioritize football since there is no lack of demand to attend Stanford, even when the football team sucks.

I'm thinking about additional applications at the margin. Stanford's acceptance rate is around 3.9%, fifth in the country (more or less). Take a look at this application trend. Notice anything interesting, perhaps a sharp increase in applications when Harbaugh and Shaw's early years are factored in? The university had decent increases during Willingham's tenure as well, but a sharp increase when Harbaugh had the first winning season in nine years, and then a sharper increase when they went 12-1. The increases persisted until 2016, when the football team started to nose over.

You can also see the same effect between Bill Walsh's successful years in the late 1970s, through John Elway, then they went down (actually declined) during the Jack Elway/Dennis Green years, then rose sharply again when Walsh returned.
undergraduate-admissions-1950-2023.pdf

I know, I know. Correlation ain't causation, I read that somewhere. Maybe it's just a heck of a coincidence.

Here's the question: is it better for the University to have a mediocre football team, a good football team or a great football team? Particularly considering the comparatively minor investment in football (relative to the University's annual expenditures).