[warren65]

I interpret TVD's quote somewhat differently.  I think she was simply saying that some players (regardless of basketball skills) are better leaders than others.  I see TVD as a realist, but also someone who believes in positive reinforcement.  
 
Someone who is a gifted basketball player, perhaps the best ever, may not also be the best leader.  In that case, give the player accolades for her skills. 
 
Someone else may be a less gifted player but a great leader.  In that case, give the player accolades for her leadership.

Yet another player may be both a great player and a great leader.  In that case, give them the world!

Chemistry is so important in team sports.  Me first attitude always hurts

How do most read this Vanderveer quote, "You can't assume that because players are seniors, that they're leaders." 
Is that a knock on Haley Jones, Hannah Jump, or Prechtel's lack of leadership? Tara in the past said Fran was a great leader and teammate but none of the other seniors that I can remember. 

My perspective. The chemistry wasn't there and I thought the team looked cliquey the latter part of the season. It was a totally different vibe than earlier in the year. I wish Tara took more ownership and said things like, I need to find better ways to help our offense get going, find chemistry on the court, and put players in positions to be successful. It kinda feels like she's blaming the players for why it all went awry but ultimately, it's her job to motivate them and develop them as leaders and prevent or minimize team drama if necessary. Yes, coaching is hard especially today with NIL and collectives, but figure out how to adapt and mentor them and help them play unselfish basketball. It doesn't give me great confidence for the future. Tara is a winner and I think we have great potential for this year but it she sounds like she's doubling down even more versus trying to make some meaningful changes.

 if tara is blaming haley, that seems really unfair. tara asked haley to play out of position, which seemed to hurt her effectiveness - and her wnba draft rank.   haley managed to smile through the season (at least on the court) anyway.  then tara blames haley? wow!

I agree, Johnny.

[warren65]

I interpret TVD's quote somewhat differently.  I think she was simply saying that some players (regardless of basketball skills) are better leaders than others.  I see TVD as a realist, but also someone who believes in positive reinforcement.  
 
Someone who is a gifted basketball player, perhaps the best ever, may not also be the best leader.  In that case, give the player accolades for her skills. 
 
Someone else may be a less gifted player but a great leader.  In that case, give the player accolades for her leadership.

Yet another player may be both a great player and a great leader.  In that case, give them the world!

Chemistry is so important in team sports.  Me first attitude always hurts

How do most read this Vanderveer quote, "You can't assume that because players are seniors, that they're leaders." 
Is that a knock on Haley Jones, Hannah Jump, or Prechtel's lack of leadership? Tara in the past said Fran was a great leader and teammate but none of the other seniors that I can remember. 

My perspective. The chemistry wasn't there and I thought the team looked cliquey the latter part of the season. It was a totally different vibe than earlier in the year. I wish Tara took more ownership and said things like, I need to find better ways to help our offense get going, find chemistry on the court, and put players in positions to be successful. It kinda feels like she's blaming the players for why it all went awry but ultimately, it's her job to motivate them and develop them as leaders and prevent or minimize team drama if necessary. Yes, coaching is hard especially today with NIL and collectives, but figure out how to adapt and mentor them and help them play unselfish basketball. It doesn't give me great confidence for the future. Tara is a winner and I think we have great potential for this year but it she sounds like she's doubling down even more versus trying to make some meaningful changes.

 if tara is blaming haley, that seems really unfair. tara asked haley to play out of position, which seemed to hurt her effectiveness - and her wnba draft rank.   haley managed to smile through the season (at least on the court) anyway.  then tara blames haley? wow!

I agree, Johnny.

[BillBradley]

By saying "there were too many things that got too many people's attention. All the NIL stuff.", note that Tara specifically linked NIL to the chemistry issue. I think what she meant by that was the NIL situation at Stanford caused problems with the team. My guess is a lot of jealousy and resentment crept into the mix and that was hugely detrimental to team chemistry. How could it not? Cam and Haley were the "haves" - the All-Americans, getting all the media attention, the brobdingnagian social media following, podcast, and getting paid a bunch of NIL money. The rest of the team was the "have nots" - role players and getting paid squat, while they were on the same team and working just as hard on the court. It's pretty tough for 40 year old adults to deal with that sort of stuff in life and still be "team players". These are 19-22 year olds. I'm not sure Tara could have done anything to fix it.

[BillBradley]

By saying "there were too many things that got too many people's attention. All the NIL stuff.", note that Tara specifically linked NIL to the chemistry issue. I think what she meant by that was the NIL situation at Stanford caused problems with the team. My guess is a lot of jealousy and resentment crept into the mix and that was hugely detrimental to team chemistry. How could it not? Cam and Haley were the "haves" - the All-Americans, getting all the media attention, the brobdingnagian social media following, podcast, and getting paid a bunch of NIL money. The rest of the team was the "have nots" - role players and getting paid squat, while they were on the same team and working just as hard on the court. It's pretty tough for 40 year old adults to deal with that sort of stuff in life and still be "team players". These are 19-22 year olds. I'm not sure Tara could have done anything to fix it.

[BobK]

No question Bill. It’s hard on coaches. It is hard on chemistry.

Btw Pretchel to France. Congrats to her

[Tweet]https://twitter.com/chrislapuma/status/1669028768638455808?s=46&t=hbAUGpzNaRK0D-jBbhrpNw[/tweet]

[BobK]

No question Bill. It’s hard on coaches. It is hard on chemistry.

Btw Pretchel to France. Congrats to her

[Tweet]https://twitter.com/chrislapuma/status/1669028768638455808?s=46&t=hbAUGpzNaRK0D-jBbhrpNw[/tweet]

[Maple Leaf]

By saying "there were too many things that got too many people's attention. All the NIL stuff.", note that Tara specifically linked NIL to the chemistry issue. I think what she meant by that was the NIL situation at Stanford caused problems with the team. My guess is a lot of jealousy and resentment crept into the mix and that was hugely detrimental to team chemistry. How could it not? Cam and Haley were the "haves" - the All-Americans, getting all the media attention, the of immense proportions social media following, podcast, and getting paid a bunch of NIL money. The rest of the team was the "have nots" - role players and getting paid squat, while they were on the same team and working just as hard on the court. It's pretty tough for 40 year old adults to deal with that sort of stuff in life and still be "team players". These are 19-22 year olds. I'm not sure Tara could have done anything to fix it.

You nailed it.  Can't fault the coaches or the players.  Thank you NCAA.

[Maple Leaf]

By saying "there were too many things that got too many people's attention. All the NIL stuff.", note that Tara specifically linked NIL to the chemistry issue. I think what she meant by that was the NIL situation at Stanford caused problems with the team. My guess is a lot of jealousy and resentment crept into the mix and that was hugely detrimental to team chemistry. How could it not? Cam and Haley were the "haves" - the All-Americans, getting all the media attention, the of immense proportions social media following, podcast, and getting paid a bunch of NIL money. The rest of the team was the "have nots" - role players and getting paid squat, while they were on the same team and working just as hard on the court. It's pretty tough for 40 year old adults to deal with that sort of stuff in life and still be "team players". These are 19-22 year olds. I'm not sure Tara could have done anything to fix it.

You nailed it.  Can't fault the coaches or the players.  Thank you NCAA.

[JohnR34231]

By saying "there were too many things that got too many people's attention. All the NIL stuff.", note that Tara specifically linked NIL to the chemistry issue. I think what she meant by that was the NIL situation at Stanford caused problems with the team. My guess is a lot of jealousy and resentment crept into the mix and that was hugely detrimental to team chemistry. How could it not? Cam and Haley were the "haves" - the All-Americans, getting all the media attention, the of immense proportions social media following, podcast, and getting paid a bunch of NIL money. The rest of the team was the "have nots" - role players and getting paid squat, while they were on the same team and working just as hard on the court. It's pretty tough for 40 year old adults to deal with that sort of stuff in life and still be "team players". These are 19-22 year olds. I'm not sure Tara could have done anything to fix it.

Wouldn't that be the same at a school like Iowa, where Caitlin Clark gets all the glory? Since they made the final game, it didn't seem to bother their team chemistry that much. Wonder what the difference was?

[JohnR34231]

By saying "there were too many things that got too many people's attention. All the NIL stuff.", note that Tara specifically linked NIL to the chemistry issue. I think what she meant by that was the NIL situation at Stanford caused problems with the team. My guess is a lot of jealousy and resentment crept into the mix and that was hugely detrimental to team chemistry. How could it not? Cam and Haley were the "haves" - the All-Americans, getting all the media attention, the of immense proportions social media following, podcast, and getting paid a bunch of NIL money. The rest of the team was the "have nots" - role players and getting paid squat, while they were on the same team and working just as hard on the court. It's pretty tough for 40 year old adults to deal with that sort of stuff in life and still be "team players". These are 19-22 year olds. I'm not sure Tara could have done anything to fix it.

Wouldn't that be the same at a school like Iowa, where Caitlin Clark gets all the glory? Since they made the final game, it didn't seem to bother their team chemistry that much. Wonder what the difference was?

[BosCard]

By saying "there were too many things that got too many people's attention. All the NIL stuff.", note that Tara specifically linked NIL to the chemistry issue. I think what she meant by that was the NIL situation at Stanford caused problems with the team. My guess is a lot of jealousy and resentment crept into the mix and that was hugely detrimental to team chemistry. How could it not? Cam and Haley were the "haves" - the All-Americans, getting all the media attention, the of immense proportions social media following, podcast, and getting paid a bunch of NIL money. The rest of the team was the "have nots" - role players and getting paid squat, while they were on the same team and working just as hard on the court. It's pretty tough for 40 year old adults to deal with that sort of stuff in life and still be "team players". These are 19-22 year olds. I'm not sure Tara could have done anything to fix it.

Wouldn't that be the same at a school like Iowa, where Caitlin Clark gets all the glory? Since they made the final game, it didn't seem to bother their team chemistry that much. Wonder what the difference was?

I think you have answered the question.  Winning "solves" a lot of problems.  Everything seems great at LSU right now but there probably would have been a lot more hand wringing and finger pointing if they had lost to Utah in the NCAA tournament.

[BosCard]

By saying "there were too many things that got too many people's attention. All the NIL stuff.", note that Tara specifically linked NIL to the chemistry issue. I think what she meant by that was the NIL situation at Stanford caused problems with the team. My guess is a lot of jealousy and resentment crept into the mix and that was hugely detrimental to team chemistry. How could it not? Cam and Haley were the "haves" - the All-Americans, getting all the media attention, the of immense proportions social media following, podcast, and getting paid a bunch of NIL money. The rest of the team was the "have nots" - role players and getting paid squat, while they were on the same team and working just as hard on the court. It's pretty tough for 40 year old adults to deal with that sort of stuff in life and still be "team players". These are 19-22 year olds. I'm not sure Tara could have done anything to fix it.

Wouldn't that be the same at a school like Iowa, where Caitlin Clark gets all the glory? Since they made the final game, it didn't seem to bother their team chemistry that much. Wonder what the difference was?

I think you have answered the question.  Winning "solves" a lot of problems.  Everything seems great at LSU right now but there probably would have been a lot more hand wringing and finger pointing if they had lost to Utah in the NCAA tournament.

[BobK]

Since the future is last year, :) Agnes did graduate from Stanford per her instagram.

[BobK]

Since the future is last year, :) Agnes did graduate from Stanford per her instagram.

[old spanish trail]

Since the future is last year, :)  Agnes did graduate from Stanford  per her instagram.

Excellent. Maybe she plans a 5th year in a related subject before med school. I don't think she transferred because of lack of playing time or NIL

[old spanish trail]

Since the future is last year, :)  Agnes did graduate from Stanford  per her instagram.

Excellent. Maybe she plans a 5th year in a related subject before med school. I don't think she transferred because of lack of playing time or NIL

[Card10Fan]

By saying "there were too many things that got too many people's attention. All the NIL stuff.", note that Tara specifically linked NIL to the chemistry issue. I think what she meant by that was the NIL situation at Stanford caused problems with the team. My guess is a lot of jealousy and resentment crept into the mix and that was hugely detrimental to team chemistry. How could it not? Cam and Haley were the "haves" - the All-Americans, getting all the media attention, the of immense proportions social media following, podcast, and getting paid a bunch of NIL money. The rest of the team was the "have nots" - role players and getting paid squat, while they were on the same team and working just as hard on the court. It's pretty tough for 40 year old adults to deal with that sort of stuff in life and still be "team players". These are 19-22 year olds. I'm not sure Tara could have done anything to fix it.

You nailed it.  Can't fault the coaches or the players.  Thank you NCAA.

If Stanford had a collective, there would be money to have for all WBB athletes. Not saying that in itself would have mattered this past year. But, many programs have that in place and it doesn’t just single out the stars on the team.

[Card10Fan]

By saying "there were too many things that got too many people's attention. All the NIL stuff.", note that Tara specifically linked NIL to the chemistry issue. I think what she meant by that was the NIL situation at Stanford caused problems with the team. My guess is a lot of jealousy and resentment crept into the mix and that was hugely detrimental to team chemistry. How could it not? Cam and Haley were the "haves" - the All-Americans, getting all the media attention, the of immense proportions social media following, podcast, and getting paid a bunch of NIL money. The rest of the team was the "have nots" - role players and getting paid squat, while they were on the same team and working just as hard on the court. It's pretty tough for 40 year old adults to deal with that sort of stuff in life and still be "team players". These are 19-22 year olds. I'm not sure Tara could have done anything to fix it.

You nailed it.  Can't fault the coaches or the players.  Thank you NCAA.

If Stanford had a collective, there would be money to have for all WBB athletes. Not saying that in itself would have mattered this past year. But, many programs have that in place and it doesn’t just single out the stars on the team.

[old spanish trail]

I thought WBB does have a collective, or is it just MBB.

[old spanish trail]

I thought WBB does have a collective, or is it just MBB.

[BobK]

I’m only aware of football and MBB with NIL collectives

---

HS tournament in Roseville tomorrow Friday Saturday. Stanford will be there as will a number of Stanford potential recruits
I live 5 miles away anyone else going?

[BobK]

I’m only aware of football and MBB with NIL collectives

---

HS tournament in Roseville tomorrow Friday Saturday. Stanford will be there as will a number of Stanford potential recruits
I live 5 miles away anyone else going?

[81alum]

Since the future is last year, :)  Agnes did graduate from Stanford  per her instagram.

Excellent. Maybe she plans a 5th year in a related subject before med school. I don't think she transferred because of lack of playing time or NIL

Emma-Nnopu is headed to TCU, with two years of eligibility.  Pardon me if this is old news--the presser is a month old.
https://gofrogs.com/news/2023/5/16/women...oster.aspx

Nivar is headed back to her home state, to a very good program at North Carolina State, that is close to  home.  Also very old news.
https://tarheelswire.usatoday.com/2023/0...dya-nivar/

Emma-Nnopu transferring to a lesser program after graduating is explicable, as is Nivar's desire to play in front of family and friends.  Of the three, only #1 recruit Betts stands out, really, and the catastrophe of losing three seems not as catastrophic as it once did.  Surly we will miss each of them on the basketball court, but it no longer looks like a mass desertion.  Each of the three seem to have had independent and very separate reasons for their decisions.

Of course, in an earlier era, the two who transferred before graduating would probably have stuck it out, and they may have been better off in the long run if they had.  But players have no incentive to "stick it out" in today's game.

[81alum]

Since the future is last year, :)  Agnes did graduate from Stanford  per her instagram.

Excellent. Maybe she plans a 5th year in a related subject before med school. I don't think she transferred because of lack of playing time or NIL

Emma-Nnopu is headed to TCU, with two years of eligibility.  Pardon me if this is old news--the presser is a month old.
https://gofrogs.com/news/2023/5/16/women...oster.aspx

Nivar is headed back to her home state, to a very good program at North Carolina State, that is close to  home.  Also very old news.
https://tarheelswire.usatoday.com/2023/0...dya-nivar/

Emma-Nnopu transferring to a lesser program after graduating is explicable, as is Nivar's desire to play in front of family and friends.  Of the three, only #1 recruit Betts stands out, really, and the catastrophe of losing three seems not as catastrophic as it once did.  Surly we will miss each of them on the basketball court, but it no longer looks like a mass desertion.  Each of the three seem to have had independent and very separate reasons for their decisions.

Of course, in an earlier era, the two who transferred before graduating would probably have stuck it out, and they may have been better off in the long run if they had.  But players have no incentive to "stick it out" in today's game.

[JohnR34231]

By saying "there were too many things that got too many people's attention. All the NIL stuff.", note that Tara specifically linked NIL to the chemistry issue. I think what she meant by that was the NIL situation at Stanford caused problems with the team. My guess is a lot of jealousy and resentment crept into the mix and that was hugely detrimental to team chemistry. How could it not? Cam and Haley were the "haves" - the All-Americans, getting all the media attention, the of immense proportions social media following, podcast, and getting paid a bunch of NIL money. The rest of the team was the "have nots" - role players and getting paid squat, while they were on the same team and working just as hard on the court. It's pretty tough for 40 year old adults to deal with that sort of stuff in life and still be "team players". These are 19-22 year olds. I'm not sure Tara could have done anything to fix it.

Wouldn't that be the same at a school like Iowa, where Caitlin Clark gets all the glory? Since they made the final game, it didn't seem to bother their team chemistry that much. Wonder what the difference was?

I think you have answered the question.  Winning "solves" a lot of problems.  Everything seems great at LSU right now but there probably would have been a lot more hand wringing and finger pointing if they had lost to Utah in the NCAA tournament.

Well, we won most of the year and then slumped at the end. Did lack of team chemistry cause the slump, or was it the result of it?

[JohnR34231]

By saying "there were too many things that got too many people's attention. All the NIL stuff.", note that Tara specifically linked NIL to the chemistry issue. I think what she meant by that was the NIL situation at Stanford caused problems with the team. My guess is a lot of jealousy and resentment crept into the mix and that was hugely detrimental to team chemistry. How could it not? Cam and Haley were the "haves" - the All-Americans, getting all the media attention, the of immense proportions social media following, podcast, and getting paid a bunch of NIL money. The rest of the team was the "have nots" - role players and getting paid squat, while they were on the same team and working just as hard on the court. It's pretty tough for 40 year old adults to deal with that sort of stuff in life and still be "team players". These are 19-22 year olds. I'm not sure Tara could have done anything to fix it.

Wouldn't that be the same at a school like Iowa, where Caitlin Clark gets all the glory? Since they made the final game, it didn't seem to bother their team chemistry that much. Wonder what the difference was?

I think you have answered the question.  Winning "solves" a lot of problems.  Everything seems great at LSU right now but there probably would have been a lot more hand wringing and finger pointing if they had lost to Utah in the NCAA tournament.

Well, we won most of the year and then slumped at the end. Did lack of team chemistry cause the slump, or was it the result of it?

[here4WBB]

I thought WBB does have a collective, or is it just MBB.

Stanford does have a collective.  The first formation was Cardinal One, which paid $50k to each of men's basketball players at the beginning of the 2022-23 season.  I'm surprised that this has not had more discussion, since it surely contributed to hard feelings for players and their parents.  Imagine Lauren Betts entering Stanford just as the NIL opens up, and she/ her family feel that she is not recognized with playing time, support with the NIL and confronted with the inequity of the men's basketball team receiving this payout.  Source:
 https://www.on3.com/nil/news/lifetime-ca...-approach/

The new collective, Cardinal Forever, has the intention to work with the women's basketball team this season.  The article also notes that the University has been reluctant to deal with the collectives after being sued on Title IX grounds in 2020; I was not aware of this.  Any way, Stanford has been off to a slow start with supporting athletes on how to best make use of NIL.  The issues around the 2020 suit and Stanford cutting varsity sports may have created dissent in the larger sports program that is trickling down to the athletes.  

The new NCAA NIL rules are unfolding in the context of media attention to singular high earners- and those individuals are making good money.  The website on3.com has a fair amount of public data (more detailed behind subscription).  On3 has a weighted formula for a players NIL value.  Cameron Brink is the only Stanford WBB player in the top 41 Div 1 women.  She is ranked at #13 with a valuation of $188.  The top two valued players are LSU Livvy Dunne and Angel Reese, valued at $3.4m and $1.6m, respectively.  Of the top 41 players shown on the public page, 30 players are valued at $200k or less.   I'm guessing with her Adidas endorsement and other deals Haley was at $100k or so at graduation.  Fran Belibi had some low visibility links on her instagram and it doesn't look like NIL was a high priority for her.   But given the explosion of sensational earnings and coaches that are riding the wave to capture commercial income for their players, how can we blame new players and their families for having entirely new expectations?  

source:  https://www.on3.com/nil/rankings/player/womens-nil-100/

The $50k payments to the men's basketball players and nothing to the women rankles me, particularly as this unfolded AFTER Stanford was challenged on Title IX grounds.  The. point has been made that Title IX does not apply to the private alumni funds, but was no consideration made to the morale of the women players, their national ranking and loyalty to Stanford?  We will never hear Tara's opinion about this and how it went down, but what a blow.

[here4WBB]

I thought WBB does have a collective, or is it just MBB.

Stanford does have a collective.  The first formation was Cardinal One, which paid $50k to each of men's basketball players at the beginning of the 2022-23 season.  I'm surprised that this has not had more discussion, since it surely contributed to hard feelings for players and their parents.  Imagine Lauren Betts entering Stanford just as the NIL opens up, and she/ her family feel that she is not recognized with playing time, support with the NIL and confronted with the inequity of the men's basketball team receiving this payout.  Source:
 https://www.on3.com/nil/news/lifetime-ca...-approach/

The new collective, Cardinal Forever, has the intention to work with the women's basketball team this season.  The article also notes that the University has been reluctant to deal with the collectives after being sued on Title IX grounds in 2020; I was not aware of this.  Any way, Stanford has been off to a slow start with supporting athletes on how to best make use of NIL.  The issues around the 2020 suit and Stanford cutting varsity sports may have created dissent in the larger sports program that is trickling down to the athletes.  

The new NCAA NIL rules are unfolding in the context of media attention to singular high earners- and those individuals are making good money.  The website on3.com has a fair amount of public data (more detailed behind subscription).  On3 has a weighted formula for a players NIL value.  Cameron Brink is the only Stanford WBB player in the top 41 Div 1 women.  She is ranked at #13 with a valuation of $188.  The top two valued players are LSU Livvy Dunne and Angel Reese, valued at $3.4m and $1.6m, respectively.  Of the top 41 players shown on the public page, 30 players are valued at $200k or less.   I'm guessing with her Adidas endorsement and other deals Haley was at $100k or so at graduation.  Fran Belibi had some low visibility links on her instagram and it doesn't look like NIL was a high priority for her.   But given the explosion of sensational earnings and coaches that are riding the wave to capture commercial income for their players, how can we blame new players and their families for having entirely new expectations?  

source:  https://www.on3.com/nil/rankings/player/womens-nil-100/

The $50k payments to the men's basketball players and nothing to the women rankles me, particularly as this unfolded AFTER Stanford was challenged on Title IX grounds.  The. point has been made that Title IX does not apply to the private alumni funds, but was no consideration made to the morale of the women players, their national ranking and loyalty to Stanford?  We will never hear Tara's opinion about this and how it went down, but what a blow.

[81alum]

The $50k payments to the men's basketball players and nothing to the women rankles me, particularly as this unfolded AFTER Stanford was challenged on Title IX grounds.  The. point has been made that Title IX does not apply to the private alumni funds, but was no consideration made to the morale of the women players, their national ranking and loyalty to Stanford?  We will never hear Tara's opinion about this and how it went down, but what a blow.

That is revolting.  Who makes the decisions about how a collective doles out the money?  Presumably the people who "collectively" contribute and not the university?  In which case, we have some really sexist donors out there.

And why do you think Tara won't comment?  She has been very outspoken about gender equity issues nationally.

[81alum]

The $50k payments to the men's basketball players and nothing to the women rankles me, particularly as this unfolded AFTER Stanford was challenged on Title IX grounds.  The. point has been made that Title IX does not apply to the private alumni funds, but was no consideration made to the morale of the women players, their national ranking and loyalty to Stanford?  We will never hear Tara's opinion about this and how it went down, but what a blow.

That is revolting.  Who makes the decisions about how a collective doles out the money?  Presumably the people who "collectively" contribute and not the university?  In which case, we have some really sexist donors out there.

And why do you think Tara won't comment?  She has been very outspoken about gender equity issues nationally.

[Goose]

I find it difficult to criticize anybody who gives money to a particular Stanford sport on the grounds that to be "fair" they should give an equal amount to all Stanford sports. Should Arrillaga be condemned because he rebuilt Stanford Stadium which helps Men's Gymnastics not at all? IMO this argument makes no sense. Why people do (or do not) contribute freely to Stanford sports is their own business. None of us have the "right" to pass judgement on their generosity.

[Goose]

I find it difficult to criticize anybody who gives money to a particular Stanford sport on the grounds that to be "fair" they should give an equal amount to all Stanford sports. Should Arrillaga be condemned because he rebuilt Stanford Stadium which helps Men's Gymnastics not at all? IMO this argument makes no sense. Why people do (or do not) contribute freely to Stanford sports is their own business. None of us have the "right" to pass judgement on their generosity.

[Card10Fan]

Stanford WBB has a fan following and presumably donor base. Heck, all WBB staff positions (head coach, associate, and two assistant positions) are all endowed. There is money. Where are those donors right now ? I'm not sure but putting together a WBB collective needs to be a focus IMO and soon.

[Card10Fan]

Stanford WBB has a fan following and presumably donor base. Heck, all WBB staff positions (head coach, associate, and two assistant positions) are all endowed. There is money. Where are those donors right now ? I'm not sure but putting together a WBB collective needs to be a focus IMO and soon.

[Softball Fan]

I find it difficult to criticize anybody who gives money to a particular Stanford sport on the grounds that to be "fair" they should give an equal amount to all Stanford sports. Should Arrillaga be condemned because he rebuilt Stanford Stadium which helps Men's Gymnastics not at all? IMO this argument makes no sense. Why people do (or do not) contribute freely to Stanford sports is their own business. None of us have the "right" to pass judgement on their generosity.

Ditto.    If sports fans with some connection to MBB want to donate to MBB why would that be frowned upon?   If I wanted to donate to WBB, I shouldn't be forced to donate to MBB.

[Softball Fan]

I find it difficult to criticize anybody who gives money to a particular Stanford sport on the grounds that to be "fair" they should give an equal amount to all Stanford sports. Should Arrillaga be condemned because he rebuilt Stanford Stadium which helps Men's Gymnastics not at all? IMO this argument makes no sense. Why people do (or do not) contribute freely to Stanford sports is their own business. None of us have the "right" to pass judgement on their generosity.

Ditto.    If sports fans with some connection to MBB want to donate to MBB why would that be frowned upon?   If I wanted to donate to WBB, I shouldn't be forced to donate to MBB.

[81alum]

But if the number of scholarships were determined solely by what donors were willing to give, and if donors only supported men's sports, it would create a situation that was intolerable and illegal, with respect to gender equity, with vastly more male scholarships than female scholarships.  And this is, unfortunately, what actually happened, long ago, until Title IX.

But because we are talking about  NIL money instead of scholarship money, this somehow makes the old inequality legal again?  Perhaps it does, although I imagine it will need to be tested in court.  Legal or not, it creates a fundamentally unethical situation.

John Arrillaga was a great friend to WBB, and was no doubt behind many of the endowments for that team.  I do not know if you added up all his contributions--including the stadium--if the ledger would show equal donations to men's and women's teams, but his sentiment was clearly to donate to both men's and women's athletics.  We need more donors with that sentiment, apparently.  I can't imagine that there would have been a MBB collective and not a WBB collective if Arrillaga were still alive and involved.

[81alum]

But if the number of scholarships were determined solely by what donors were willing to give, and if donors only supported men's sports, it would create a situation that was intolerable and illegal, with respect to gender equity, with vastly more male scholarships than female scholarships.  And this is, unfortunately, what actually happened, long ago, until Title IX.

But because we are talking about  NIL money instead of scholarship money, this somehow makes the old inequality legal again?  Perhaps it does, although I imagine it will need to be tested in court.  Legal or not, it creates a fundamentally unethical situation.

John Arrillaga was a great friend to WBB, and was no doubt behind many of the endowments for that team.  I do not know if you added up all his contributions--including the stadium--if the ledger would show equal donations to men's and women's teams, but his sentiment was clearly to donate to both men's and women's athletics.  We need more donors with that sentiment, apparently.  I can't imagine that there would have been a MBB collective and not a WBB collective if Arrillaga were still alive and involved.

[GK3]

But if the number of scholarships were determined solely by what donors were willing to give, and if donors only supported men's sports, it would create a situation that was intolerable and illegal, with respect to gender equity, with vastly more male scholarships than female scholarships.  And this is, unfortunately, what actually happened, long ago, until Title IX.

But because we are talking about  NIL money instead of scholarship money, this somehow makes the old inequality legal again?  Perhaps it does, although I imagine it will need to be tested in court.  Legal or not, it creates a fundamentally unethical situation.

John Arrillaga was a great friend to WBB, and was no doubt behind many of the endowments for that team.  I do not know if you added up all his contributions--including the stadium--if the ledger would show equal donations to men's and women's teams, but his sentiment was clearly to donate to both men's and women's athletics.  We need more donors with that sentiment, apparently.  I can't imagine that there would have been a MBB collective and not a WBB collective if Arrillaga were still alive and involved.

We also need a change in attitude at the upper reaches of the administration.  I think we have to have a University led effort to find a way to make this work, but I get the feeling the University whishes it would all go away.

[GK3]

But if the number of scholarships were determined solely by what donors were willing to give, and if donors only supported men's sports, it would create a situation that was intolerable and illegal, with respect to gender equity, with vastly more male scholarships than female scholarships.  And this is, unfortunately, what actually happened, long ago, until Title IX.

But because we are talking about  NIL money instead of scholarship money, this somehow makes the old inequality legal again?  Perhaps it does, although I imagine it will need to be tested in court.  Legal or not, it creates a fundamentally unethical situation.

John Arrillaga was a great friend to WBB, and was no doubt behind many of the endowments for that team.  I do not know if you added up all his contributions--including the stadium--if the ledger would show equal donations to men's and women's teams, but his sentiment was clearly to donate to both men's and women's athletics.  We need more donors with that sentiment, apparently.  I can't imagine that there would have been a MBB collective and not a WBB collective if Arrillaga were still alive and involved.

We also need a change in attitude at the upper reaches of the administration.  I think we have to have a University led effort to find a way to make this work, but I get the feeling the University whishes it would all go away.