onsager

Oh spare me. BART is terrible unless you're in the city and even then it pales in comparison to Tokyo, London, Paris, HK and NYC. None of those cities are relevant to Austin's situation. Y'all are entitled to y'all's opinion and I'm entitled to mine - that's the beauty of living in a country like America. I think there's probably nothing y'all could say to change my mind, just as there's probably nothing I could say to change y'all's. Let's agree to disagree.

This is a pretty abysmal take, in my opinion. When public transit is done well (and to be clear, I'm not saying it's done well in Austin), people will use it instead of driving. For example, I used to drive almost everywhere when I lived in the Houston area. After I moved to the Bay Area, I walk, bike, or use public transportation for 95% of my trips, and only use my car when going to the beach/mountains/camping/etc. with friends. If you are someone who loves driving, it is in your best interests to have well-designed public transit. It means there will be fewer cars on the road and you'll be stuck in less traffic, which saves you time. And, it means people like me can save money and be healthier by walking, biking, and taking public transit instead of driving. In fact, for trips that are <2 miles, biking is usually faster than driving for me here, making it kinetically favorable. Right now, we are stuck in the high energy transition state between two energy minima, which is what results in these non-idealities. But if Austin commits to doing this right (and in a cost-effective way) I think it'll be very good for the city in the long run.

It's pretty good. They've made a huge effort to improve their image academically, and I think it's working. I'd still place it a tier (or more) below a school like UT Austin though.

That's pretty fair. The Big 10 has always had that reputation, and for good reason, especially now that the Pac-12 is gone. I hate Texas A&M as much as anyone (I refused to apply there for undergrad on principle), but I can't deny that I have a lot of respect for their engineering and business programs. That doesn't change the fact that they're worse than us and their administration has a loser mentality that has led to nearly a century's worth of failures athletically. It's possible for multiple things to be true.

It's a small world - cool to see another Cardinal on this board too. I bike past Encina Hall pretty much every day and have been to a number of football, basketball, baseball, and volleyball games during my time here, including the Stanford vs. Texas super regional and Stanford vs. Texas women's volleyball game from the past year. Unfortunately, I think the Thai place you're talking about has closed down, but I've heard from many people that it was to die for.

I agree that, on average, the Big 10 is (significantly) stronger academically than the SEC. I think it's not as black and white as you're making it seem, however. The SEC has some great schools, like Vanderbilt, Texas, Texas A&M, Florida, and Georgia. The Big 10 also has some pretty mediocre ones, like Oregon, Nebraska, and Iowa. Who knows how realignment will change this too, since Virginia, North Carolina, Stanford, and Cal are all fantastic academically and will be up for grabs when the ACC crumbles. In any case, I don't give a fuck about the rest of the SEC or how other people perceive it. I'm a Texas fan, and we are exceptional at everything we do, whether it's academics or athletics. That's all that matters to me.

I went to Texas for undergrad and Stanford for my PhD. It's a blessing to be a (huge) fan of both!

Like closetojumping said, NIL is not as big of a part of the allure of coming to Stanford as opposed to other programs (e.g., Texas A&M). However, organizations like Lifetime Cardinal have started to pick up steam and there's an extremely wealthy core of alumni that are dedicated to making sure that Stanford Athletics exists and is good. It's slowly starting to make a difference from what I have heard. I think Stanford fans are hopeful about football though. (I think the men's basketball coach should be fired, so I don't feel particularly hopeful about that.) Taylor seems to be a decent coach and there is a good amount of excitement among alumni/fans/donors about him. I think Stanford's most recent recruiting class is actually quite solid considering the (abysmal) state the team was left in after David Shaw resigned (almost all of the starters transferred) and the rebuild will just take time. Although the admissions hurdles are not ideal, I am bullish on Stanford football eventually returning to its heyday (consistent top 25 program with flashes of brilliance).

Gotcha, thanks for letting me know about Staes. What a blessing it is to be (potentially) choosing between Yurosek and Niblack, they're both excellent. I fucking love Sark.

Yurosek is fantastic - I've watched him play the past ~2 years. He has been held back by poor QB play at Stanford but with Quinn I think the sky's the limit. I'll be really happy if we can get him, assuming we can't get Staes from Tennessee.