(05-27-2014 09:37 AM)bearcatlawjd Wrote:  Schools like UC have a budget over a billion dollars. At the end of the day these schools will find the money to compete.

The portion of such budgets that is fungible is closer to $100m. I'm at an AAU school right now. When they slashed our budget by $10m, we lost 10% of our yearly operating income that is devoted to teaching and classes, and our total budget is bigger than UC's, with over $400m in research. When you look at what is fungible in these budgets, you have to subtract $400-$600m for research (which is already assigned), $100m for the physical plant and utilities, millions for yearly increases in health care and technology (wired campuses), $100m for dorms and food, $100m for staff and police (ever see how much a university policeman makes?).

Only 10% of our plus billion budget is in service of classroom instruction.

1. AAC schools will not force all conference schools to pay players, not when the schools who do pay will get a natural advantage over those who don't.

2. When you look at any universities tuition webpage, they already list true-cost-of-attendance figures. Why? Because the federal gov't mandates that they do this. They have to do it. Right now, however, almost any college is only going to show true costs in the $1k-$2.5k range. These costs are transportation to and from campus, extra food, etc. Here;'s what I wonder: when the P5 jack up the "true costs" figure into the $5k range, are they going to show that cost for all students? It seems to me they have to so that the stipend will not be treated as income to the athletes. If all students are spending the amount out-of-pocket, you can argue that this is NOT income. But what happens to the federal requirement on the webpages? How many students will see that and think, $5k extra? No way!

3. I believe the stipends are just temporary anyway before the P5 move to a professional model. This is just one small step. Nationally, there are new accreditation issues at every college because of more stringent standards. UNC is having a helluva time with its scandal trying to make sure its on the right side of the accreditors. This means that every program and class is being vetted for accreditation right now. Why? Because the online for-profit colleges have complained about the lack of accreditation. Having so many classes taught by non-credentialed faculty isn't going to fly anymore. I sense that a future model for college sports will give students the option of earning a nominal salary or else choosing tuition remission for those that can cut it at the college level.

(05-27-2014 11:38 AM)stever20 Wrote:  The problem for Southern Miss/UAB now though will be that if they aren't paying the FCOA, and a school like Tulane is- those guys would start going to Tulane over Southern Miss/UAB and still get to stay close to home.

That was what I was saying. THOSE schools would be the ones hurt. But a school like, just to name a couple - Eastern Michigan or Troy - will largely be unaffected, and will still get the same caliber of players they are getting now.

I could see Eastern Michigan or Troy hurt some. If So Miss/UAB aren't getting guys they normally would have gotten- they will go after some of the guys that Troy for instance would have gotten.

(05-27-2014 12:41 PM)stever20 Wrote:  I could see Eastern Michigan or Troy hurt some. If So Miss/UAB aren't getting guys they normally would have gotten- they will go after some of the guys that Troy for instance would have gotten.

But in the overall scheme of things would those recruits really be any different? They are still the same 2 or 3 star recruit.

(05-27-2014 12:10 PM)upstater1 Wrote:  

(05-27-2014 09:37 AM)bearcatlawjd Wrote:  Schools like UC have a budget over a billion dollars. At the end of the day these schools will find the money to compete.

The portion of such budgets that is fungible is closer to $100m. I'm at an AAU school right now. When they slashed our budget by $10m, we lost 10% of our yearly operating income that is devoted to teaching and classes, and our total budget is bigger than UC's, with over $400m in research.

Yes, generally speaking, no matter how big its revenues or endowment, if a university has money available to it, that money gets spoken for and committed, and quickly. Schools don't generally have uncommitted free cash lying around. That's why all schools, even Harvard, have an insatiable desire for new money, new revenue.

So that's what makes the new media deals and playoff money so important. It represents new money that those schools have to play around with. It's not a coincidence that these new P5 initiatives for "autonomy" and "full cost of tuition" are being pushed just as this new money is coming online. It's brand new money and the P5 are getting a lot more of it than the G5.

(05-27-2014 12:20 PM)upstater1 Wrote:  1. AAC schools will not force all conference schools to pay players, not when the schools who do pay will get a natural advantage over those who don't.

I believe that will happen. Who's to say that a school wants to put the COA amount toward facilities. A school may want to upgrade their facilities than spending cash towards the player. That is one of the advantages the P5 have over most of the G5 is they have better facilities to wow recruits.

(05-27-2014 12:43 PM)MWC Tex Wrote:  

(05-27-2014 12:41 PM)stever20 Wrote:  I could see Eastern Michigan or Troy hurt some. If So Miss/UAB aren't getting guys they normally would have gotten- they will go after some of the guys that Troy for instance would have gotten.

But in the overall scheme of things would those recruits really be any different? They are still the same 2 or 3 star recruit.

Pretty much. And they really aren't enough "up the food chain" to really snatch guys away from home anymore. Like I said, my prediction is, places like USM, UAB, UCF, Tulane, ECU, Houston, and Memphis, upper level non-BCS schools who are in recruiting hotbeds who often got players coveted by P5 but who want to stay home, if any of them did not join and pay up they would be the ones hurt (I left out teams that were formerly in the Big East). But most G5 schools, by and large, would not see a big change from the current landscape.

(05-27-2014 12:43 PM)MWC Tex Wrote:  

(05-27-2014 12:41 PM)stever20 Wrote:  I could see Eastern Michigan or Troy hurt some. If So Miss/UAB aren't getting guys they normally would have gotten- they will go after some of the guys that Troy for instance would have gotten.

But in the overall scheme of things would those recruits really be any different? They are still the same 2 or 3 star recruit.

Could very possibly be different. The question will be would a recruit select UAB/Southern Miss over a Troy for instance.

(05-27-2014 12:49 PM)MWC Tex Wrote:  

(05-27-2014 12:20 PM)upstater1 Wrote:  1. AAC schools will not force all conference schools to pay players, not when the schools who do pay will get a natural advantage over those who don't.

I believe that will happen. Who's to say that a school wants to put the COA amount toward facilities. A school may want to upgrade their facilities than spending cash towards the player. That is one of the advantages the P5 have over most of the G5 is they have better facilities to wow recruits.

you hope that happens. I totally think the AAC schools will be all in with regards to the COA. And yes it would be a conference mandate.

(05-27-2014 12:52 PM)adcorbett Wrote:  

(05-27-2014 12:43 PM)MWC Tex Wrote:  

(05-27-2014 12:41 PM)stever20 Wrote:  I could see Eastern Michigan or Troy hurt some. If So Miss/UAB aren't getting guys they normally would have gotten- they will go after some of the guys that Troy for instance would have gotten.

But in the overall scheme of things would those recruits really be any different? They are still the same 2 or 3 star recruit.

Pretty much. And they really aren't enough "up the food chain" to really snatch guys away from home anymore. Like I said, my prediction is, places like USM, UAB, UCF, Tulane, ECU, Houston, and Memphis, upper level non-BCS schools who are in recruiting hotbeds who often got players coveted by P5 but who want to stay home, if any of them did not join and pay up they would be the ones hurt (I left out teams that were formerly in the Big East). But most G5 schools, by and large, would not see a big change from the current landscape.

The question will be if USM or UAB aren't getting those guys you're referring to, would a lower tier recruit view them as being above Sun Belt schools they used to would have gone to. If so, that impacts the rest of the G5.

The $$$ issues aren't just in the AAC, but also schools in the so called p5 conferences. I think their hungry bottom feeder schools will have similar objections as to what percent they're cornered to cover, and perhaps may be force to cut-down in the number of sports they currently sponsor.

(05-27-2014 01:38 PM)BigHouston Wrote:  The $$$ issues aren't just in the AAC, but also schools in the so called p5 conferences. I think their hungry bottom feeder schools will have similar objections as to what percent they're cornered to cover, and perhaps may be force to cut-down in the number of sports they currently sponsor.

Yeah but conferences like the big 10 make $40 million per school. Acc makes $20 million. That is a huge head start.

You all are all worrying abut the wrong thing. Don't you see the path in which this is going. The P5 knows that the COA will be paid by all of the AAC and some of the MWC. Once they get the $5-$6k COA set, then it will be raising the number of scholarships per sport across the board. Then, it will be the end game for those who are not receiving P5 money.

Phase 1
And
Phase 2

Of creating the final dividing line.

(05-27-2014 02:15 PM)Borncoog74 Wrote:  You all are all worrying abut the wrong thing. Don't you see the path in which this is going. The P5 knows that the COA will be paid by all of the AAC and some of the MWC. Once they get the $5-$6k COA set, then it will be raising the number of scholarships per sport across the board. Then, it will be the end game for those who are not receiving P5 money.

Phase 1
And
Phase 2

Of creating the final dividing line.

I don't see them raising the scholarships though. Lots of the P5 schools wouldn't want that to happen because then schools like alabama would just get more and more players. That's the thing.

(05-27-2014 02:15 PM)Borncoog74 Wrote:  You all are all worrying abut the wrong thing. Don't you see the path in which this is going. The P5 knows that the COA will be paid by all of the AAC and some of the MWC. Once they get the $5-$6k COA set, then it will be raising the number of scholarships per sport across the board. Then, it will be the end game for those who are not receiving P5 money.

Phase 1
And
Phase 2

Of creating the final dividing line.

You on the right track--it just wont be scholarships that create the final break. After a short period of the P5 playing with one set of rules and the rest playing by other rules, there will be a move among the P5 to put everyone under one set of required rules.

End game. Everyone wont be able to make it under the garage door before it closes. Most wont be able to afford to. That's why I see a conference developing that mandates most of the P5 changes. I think it will be the AAC. I think the AAC will add 4-6 MW teams over the next decade--becoming a nationwide conference that largely offers all the P5 student athlete benefits. This group of schools will be the ones that make it into the new "D4".

(05-27-2014 02:31 PM)Attackcoog Wrote:  

(05-27-2014 02:15 PM)Borncoog74 Wrote:  You all are all worrying abut the wrong thing. Don't you see the path in which this is going. The P5 knows that the COA will be paid by all of the AAC and some of the MWC. Once they get the $5-$6k COA set, then it will be raising the number of scholarships per sport across the board. Then, it will be the end game for those who are not receiving P5 money.

Phase 1
And
Phase 2

Of creating the final dividing line.

You on the right track--it just wont be scholarships that create the final break. After a short period of the P5 playing with one set of rules and the rest playing by other rules, there will be a move among the P5 to put everyone under one set of required rules.

End game. Everyone wont be able to make it under the garage door before it closes. Most wont be able to afford to. That's why I see a conference developing that mandates most of the P5 changes. I think it will be the AAC. I think the AAC will add 4-6 MW teams over the next decade--becoming a nationwide conference that largely offers all the P5 student athlete benefits. This group of schools will be the ones that make it into the new "D4".

If scholarships due increase, so will the number of unhappy bench players = more transfers.

(05-26-2014 09:59 PM)Pony94 Wrote:  Please let it be a Larry type hire

Mike Price 100%

(05-26-2014 07:24 PM)MWC Tex Wrote:  Not to mention, a lot athletes chose a school based on the relationship with the coaches...not $$$.

THIS^^^^^^^^^

@ ECU, we're starting to see this concept touted as "a big factor" more recruits, and better recruits, chose to sign with the Pirates. Coach Ruff & his staff are steadily improving their recruiting game. Hopefully we can keep this staff intact for a good bit of time.

Posted from my mobile device using the CSNbbs App

(05-27-2014 03:21 PM)ENCPir87769 Wrote:  

(05-26-2014 07:24 PM)MWC Tex Wrote:  Not to mention, a lot athletes chose a school based on the relationship with the coaches...not $$$.

THIS^^^^^^^^^

@ ECU, we're starting to see this concept touted as "a big factor" more recruits, and better recruits, chose to sign with the Pirates. Coach Ruff & his staff are steadily improving their recruiting game. Hopefully we can keep this staff intact for a good bit of time.

Posted from my mobile device using the CSNbbs App

I agree and disagree. Coaches are important. Very. But to act like in a few years, if ECU wasn't offering the FCOA and say Old Dominion was offering it- that's going to be a signifigant hurdle that Ruffin would have to overcome. For some players, it's going to be too big of a hurdle. 4-5 thousand dollars for some of these kids is just huge. Also, I know coaching youth basketball- quite frankly a lot of the kids that are better a lot of times are the ones that need the $$$ the most.

I just think it's absolutely insane to say that it's going to be a very minor factor. I think for instance, a lot of recruits won't even talk with a coach of a program that doesn't offer the FCOA. So coach could be the best guy in the world but it wouldn't matter.