http://footballscoop.com/news/13361-iowa-state-ad

Quote:Last week, the NCAA moved forward with legislation that would allow Power Five schools to provide cost-of-attendance scholarships for their student-athletes and would allow programs to provide unlimited food for its athletes, scholarship or walk-on.

It's a long overdue move that was rightly celebrated. Not many, however, have asked the question of what it's all going to cost.

Iowa State athletics director Jamie Pollard has an educated guess. "It would be a big outlay of expenditures for us — probably close to $750,000 (a year)," Pollard told Des Moines Register To cover the cost, the Cyclones would likely have to pass it off to the consumer. "And we're self-funded, so we'd have to pass that on or cut in other areas."

They go on to say that Iowa State only had about a $30K surplus this past season, so the additional costs of the benefits would have to come from other areas.

Fans are better than taxpayers for this particular payment.

This will be a game changer for big time college athletics, and IMHO not for the better. Attendance issues are becoming more common among the schools with only a handful of CFB teams being immune to to it. It will only get worse when these costs get passed on to the consumers - the same consumers that will see higher dish and cable bills now that everyone is trying to create and sell sports networks. Sooner or later, people will wake up and realize that the financial investment for maintaining fandom is not sustainable. Add in the greater number of choices for entertainment that is out there today than 5 or 10 years ago, and it gets even easier to cast sports aside.

Pfffft. Only teams that sell out and have excess demand can get away with increasing ticket prices to cover these costs.

Also, I'm not moved by the crocodile tears of an athletic director who is paid in the high six figures, at least, while he is complaining about the cost of feeding student-athletes.

(04-29-2014 04:49 PM)miko33 Wrote:  This will be a game changer for big time college athletics, and IMHO not for the better. Attendance issues are becoming more common among the schools with only a handful of CFB teams being immune to to it. It will only get worse when these costs get passed on to the consumers - the same consumers that will see higher dish and cable bills now that everyone is trying to create and sell sports networks. Sooner or later, people will wake up and realize that the financial investment for maintaining fandom is not sustainable. Add in the greater number of choices for entertainment that is out there today than 5 or 10 years ago, and it gets even easier to cast sports aside.

For a school getting $30 million from the Big12, it seems like $750,000 would not be very significant

You mean its NOT SUBSIDIZED by TV contracts?

(04-29-2014 04:55 PM)SMUmustangs Wrote:  

(04-29-2014 04:49 PM)miko33 Wrote:  This will be a game changer for big time college athletics, and IMHO not for the better. Attendance issues are becoming more common among the schools with only a handful of CFB teams being immune to to it. It will only get worse when these costs get passed on to the consumers - the same consumers that will see higher dish and cable bills now that everyone is trying to create and sell sports networks. Sooner or later, people will wake up and realize that the financial investment for maintaining fandom is not sustainable. Add in the greater number of choices for entertainment that is out there today than 5 or 10 years ago, and it gets even easier to cast sports aside.

For a school getting $30 million from the Big12, it seems like $750,000 would not be very significant

Except that money is largely earmarked for current obligations already. Travel, salaries for coaches, expenses for running the facilities, etc. It's one thing if there were significant revenue surpluses going to the universities themselves. However, most AD's are lucky to break even and a number of them are running deficits that have to be covered by the university general funds. Paying stipends will be passed on to the consumers, and consumers will hit a limit as to what they will pay. I think they are close to the limit now based on the flagging attendance figures that most schools are seeing. That's just my opinion. We'll find out in the next few years.

Shocking. WTF did anybody think the money would come from?

In some way shape or form the cost will be passed on.... whether its via increased cable fees, begging for more althletic donations, increasing student fees to pay for other students "full cost of attendance"..... it was ultimately going to come from the fans / students.

Basic economics folks.

(04-29-2014 05:06 PM)miko33 Wrote:  

(04-29-2014 04:55 PM)SMUmustangs Wrote:  

(04-29-2014 04:49 PM)miko33 Wrote:  This will be a game changer for big time college athletics, and IMHO not for the better. Attendance issues are becoming more common among the schools with only a handful of CFB teams being immune to to it. It will only get worse when these costs get passed on to the consumers - the same consumers that will see higher dish and cable bills now that everyone is trying to create and sell sports networks. Sooner or later, people will wake up and realize that the financial investment for maintaining fandom is not sustainable. Add in the greater number of choices for entertainment that is out there today than 5 or 10 years ago, and it gets even easier to cast sports aside.

For a school getting $30 million from the Big12, it seems like $750,000 would not be very significant

Except that money is largely earmarked for current obligations already. Travel, salaries for coaches, expenses for running the facilities, etc. It's one thing if there were significant revenue surpluses going to the universities themselves. However, most AD's are lucky to break even and a number of them are running deficits that have to be covered by the university general funds. Paying stipends will be passed on to the consumers, and consumers will hit a limit as to what they will pay. I think they are close to the limit now based on the flagging attendance figures that most schools are seeing. That's just my opinion. We'll find out in the next few years.

And, Iowa State has to keep up with Texas, Oklahoma, etc in Facilities

Ignoring the G5, the new "changes" that are coming will do serious damage to a number of P5 programs. This is an example of such.

Let's say Iowa St. decides to match player compensation with WHATEVER Texas does. How are they now going to be able to maintain on the facilities/coaching front?

...they likely won't - and that fact alone could really turn most P5 conferences into something similar to La Liga (Spain).

(04-29-2014 04:55 PM)Wedge Wrote:  Pfffft. Only teams that sell out and have excess demand can get away with increasing ticket prices to cover these costs.

Also, I'm not moved by the crocodile tears of an athletic director who is paid in the high six figures, at least, while he is complaining about the cost of feeding student-athletes.

Ranks right up there with AD that I can't think of right now who cut two men's sports and decried how Title IX was forcing him to eliminate those sports that combined cost the department less than $500k.

Had nothing to do with giving one of his coaches a million dollar raise

April has been a suck month for me. Needed a minor car repair and the shop came up with another $2k in suggested repairs. I had just gotten my hands on $1400 so I picked $1400 in repairs that would head off more expensive repairs and most contribute to extending the vehicle's useful life.

In the meantime began pricing a new washing machine since ours in barely hanging on and I've got money saved for it on top of my usual reserve.

The car broke down and it wasn't an easily foreseeable repair so I dipped into savings for another $500.

So now I've got to defer the washing machine replacement and I'm altering my spending to build the savings back up at a faster pace.

Athletic departments go through money like my kids would go through Halloween candy if we hadn't made them put it up. The only bad dollar is the dollar not spent.

Hugh Freeze just got a really nice raise at Ole Miss. I think very highly of Hugh but his performance so far in my book doesn't make him a $3 million coach but the Rebs wanted to reduce the pool of schools that could afford him and it doesn't look good to be that far out of line with conference spending, so they spent it.

There is no mandate that a football coach receive $7 million or $5 million or even $500,000.

Does pay limit your candidate pool? Of course it does but the MAC is hiring good coaches (at least deemed good enough to get hired away) and the highest pay is a half million.

Schools now fly for trips they wouldn't have dreamed of flying to 10 years ago.

There aren't five FBS schools that couldn't cut a million out of their budget and devote it to stipends and other stipends if they wanted to.

Just seems like another endorsement opportunity to me. Uniforms and equipment provided by Nike...meals provided by Kraft (or Chic-fil-a, Chipolte, YUM, etc).

(04-29-2014 05:06 PM)miko33 Wrote:  

(04-29-2014 04:55 PM)SMUmustangs Wrote:  

(04-29-2014 04:49 PM)miko33 Wrote:  This will be a game changer for big time college athletics, and IMHO not for the better. Attendance issues are becoming more common among the schools with only a handful of CFB teams being immune to to it. It will only get worse when these costs get passed on to the consumers - the same consumers that will see higher dish and cable bills now that everyone is trying to create and sell sports networks. Sooner or later, people will wake up and realize that the financial investment for maintaining fandom is not sustainable. Add in the greater number of choices for entertainment that is out there today than 5 or 10 years ago, and it gets even easier to cast sports aside.

For a school getting $30 million from the Big12, it seems like $750,000 would not be very significant

Except that money is largely earmarked for current obligations already. Travel, salaries for coaches, expenses for running the facilities, etc. It's one thing if there were significant revenue surpluses going to the universities themselves. However, most AD's are lucky to break even and a number of them are running deficits that have to be covered by the university general funds. Paying stipends will be passed on to the consumers, and consumers will hit a limit as to what they will pay. I think they are close to the limit now based on the flagging attendance figures that most schools are seeing. That's just my opinion. We'll find out in the next few years.

I know that. The thing is, just because it is earmarked does not mean it is wisely spent or even necessary.

(04-29-2014 04:55 PM)Wedge Wrote:  Pfffft. Only teams that sell out and have excess demand can get away with increasing ticket prices to cover these costs.

Also, I'm not moved by the crocodile tears of an athletic director who is paid in the high six figures, at least, while he is complaining about the cost of feeding student-athletes.

THANK YOU.

This Iowa State AD is displaying a pretty basic lack of economic knowledge. Iowa State football doesn't have "excess demand" and Iowa State football's price elasticity is most certainly not zero.

Good luck increasing revenue too much on the fans backs. Perhaps he'll have to worry about decreasing expenses.

(04-29-2014 04:49 PM)miko33 Wrote:  This will be a game changer for big time college athletics, and IMHO not for the better. Attendance issues are becoming more common among the schools with only a handful of CFB teams being immune to to it. It will only get worse when these costs get passed on to the consumers - the same consumers that will see higher dish and cable bills now that everyone is trying to create and sell sports networks. Sooner or later, people will wake up and realize that the financial investment for maintaining fandom is not sustainable. Add in the greater number of choices for entertainment that is out there today than 5 or 10 years ago, and it gets even easier to cast sports aside.

It's bigger than just sports Miko. It is the dwindling largess of the American middle class and it is being eroded at the pump and grocery store on the low end, and by the replacement of pensions by the 401k, the changes coming in insurance in general as Boomers age, the loss of those jobs that the college grads can't seem to find, and chronic emphasis on debt and credit for a parasitic banking culture. I have a sneaking suspicion it's going to hit professional sports hard within a decade. So the spiral upward for the colleges is hardly a solo act. We'll see.

(04-29-2014 04:49 PM)miko33 Wrote:  This will be a game changer for big time college athletics, and IMHO not for the better. Attendance issues are becoming more common among the schools with only a handful of CFB teams being immune to to it. It will only get worse when these costs get passed on to the consumers - the same consumers that will see higher dish and cable bills now that everyone is trying to create and sell sports networks. Sooner or later, people will wake up and realize that the financial investment for maintaining fandom is not sustainable. Add in the greater number of choices for entertainment that is out there today than 5 or 10 years ago, and it gets even easier to cast sports aside.

It is only a game changer because they are poorly run. All the P5 schools have had TV double or more in the last 3 or 4 years, and yet they are still broke. That is piss poor management. You get 10 mil more for TV and can't afford a mil for athletes?? Sorry the whole bunch should be fired.

(04-30-2014 07:08 AM)goodknightfl Wrote:  

(04-29-2014 04:49 PM)miko33 Wrote:  This will be a game changer for big time college athletics, and IMHO not for the better. Attendance issues are becoming more common among the schools with only a handful of CFB teams being immune to to it. It will only get worse when these costs get passed on to the consumers - the same consumers that will see higher dish and cable bills now that everyone is trying to create and sell sports networks. Sooner or later, people will wake up and realize that the financial investment for maintaining fandom is not sustainable. Add in the greater number of choices for entertainment that is out there today than 5 or 10 years ago, and it gets even easier to cast sports aside.

It is only a game changer because they are poorly run. All the P5 schools have had TV double or more in the last 3 or 4 years, and yet they are still broke. That is piss poor management. You get 10 mil more for TV and can't afford a mil for athletes?? Sorry the whole bunch should be fired.

That is Clear!

And there is always the fan's option to pass the buck right back:

60" HDTV (cost of the service provider)
One case of ice cold beer ($17.00)
Hot dogs/buns and a microwave ( $3.00)
Microwave popcorn ( $1.00)
Driveway parking (free)

This fan option is becoming increasingly popular.

(04-29-2014 05:06 PM)miko33 Wrote:  

(04-29-2014 04:55 PM)SMUmustangs Wrote:  

(04-29-2014 04:49 PM)miko33 Wrote:  This will be a game changer for big time college athletics, and IMHO not for the better. Attendance issues are becoming more common among the schools with only a handful of CFB teams being immune to to it. It will only get worse when these costs get passed on to the consumers - the same consumers that will see higher dish and cable bills now that everyone is trying to create and sell sports networks. Sooner or later, people will wake up and realize that the financial investment for maintaining fandom is not sustainable. Add in the greater number of choices for entertainment that is out there today than 5 or 10 years ago, and it gets even easier to cast sports aside.

For a school getting $30 million from the Big12, it seems like $750,000 would not be very significant

Except that money is largely earmarked for current obligations already. Travel, salaries for coaches, expenses for running the facilities, etc. It's one thing if there were significant revenue surpluses going to the universities themselves. However, most AD's are lucky to break even and a number of them are running deficits that have to be covered by the university general funds. Paying stipends will be passed on to the consumers, and consumers will hit a limit as to what they will pay. I think they are close to the limit now based on the flagging attendance figures that most schools are seeing. That's just my opinion. We'll find out in the next few years.

Logical as your arguments may be, you won't find very many sympathetic ears here. Do you know what UCF's athletic department could do with that much money in tv revenue? Or ECU? Usf? We've been able to accomplish a lot with just crumbs by comparison. Iowa state's ad can suck it. When I hear them complaining about this kind of stuff, it makes me think of the likes of Kim Kardashian complaining about her life.