Re: I think you're selling the advantage short
I took the 2X to mean twice as many athletes in number not dollars. Even some of the equivalency sports(team based for example baseball, softball, lax think soccer as well) have roster limits on the number of active players and counter limits on the total number of team members that can receive aid that pretty much caps the difference in terms of using need based aid versus athletic money. As I mentioned, I am not sure how or even if there are these type restrictions in sports like swimming and track and field which would seem to offer the opportunity for the most disparity between a well endowed Stanford and others with smaller endowments. Maybe I am selling it too short, particularly if the measure is raw dollars as opposed to raw number of participating athletes. One thing is for sure, Stanford has a lot of money and at one time, guessing it still holds true, fully funded the most varsity level sports available in D-1. This also helped in the Learfield Cup(Director's Cup, other previous iterations) competition as your odds are better if you fund the maximum number of sports and can pick the top 20 in counting Cup points.
|
(
In response to this post by Pylons)
Posted: 12/15/2017 at 10:13AM