(08-25-2015 07:50 AM)FrancisDrake Wrote:  

(08-24-2015 12:30 PM)MplsBison Wrote:  What is this legislation?

If students vote amongst themselves to pay a fee that supports athletics, then that's that. Nothing more can be said.

http://hamptonroads.com/2015/03/mcauliff...udent-fees

State system legislation to reduce/regulate athletic student fees.

"ODU essentially has... to meet the 55 percent limit, which President John Broderick said is reasonable. According to a USA Today data base of athletic budgets, ODU funded about 73 percent of its athletic budget through student fees in 2012-2013."

It's one thing if the fees were imposed on the students without their consent. In that case, I can see putting a cap on the fees.

But if the students vote fees on themselves that fund the athletic department 100%, it doesn't matter! The students have spoken, and that's that.


The legislation is wrong, if it isn't smart enough to differentiate between the two obviously different cases.

(08-25-2015 04:31 PM)MplsBison Wrote:  

(08-25-2015 07:50 AM)FrancisDrake Wrote:  

(08-24-2015 12:30 PM)MplsBison Wrote:  What is this legislation?

If students vote amongst themselves to pay a fee that supports athletics, then that's that. Nothing more can be said.

http://hamptonroads.com/2015/03/mcauliff...udent-fees

State system legislation to reduce/regulate athletic student fees.

"ODU essentially has... to meet the 55 percent limit, which President John Broderick said is reasonable. According to a USA Today data base of athletic budgets, ODU funded about 73 percent of its athletic budget through student fees in 2012-2013."

It's one thing if the fees were imposed on the students without their consent. In that case, I can see putting a cap on the fees.

But if the students vote fees on themselves that fund the athletic department 100%, it doesn't matter! The students have spoken, and that's that.


The legislation is wrong, if it isn't smart enough to differentiate between the two obviously different cases.

Maybe, but students matriculate rapidly (at least we hope they do). Should students in 2015 be made to pay student fees that were voted on by students in 2010, when most of those students are now gone? Should a university have to pole students every four years for approval of fees? Its a very fluid situation....

(08-26-2015 08:38 AM)FrancisDrake Wrote:  

(08-25-2015 04:31 PM)MplsBison Wrote:  

(08-25-2015 07:50 AM)FrancisDrake Wrote:  

(08-24-2015 12:30 PM)MplsBison Wrote:  What is this legislation?

If students vote amongst themselves to pay a fee that supports athletics, then that's that. Nothing more can be said.

http://hamptonroads.com/2015/03/mcauliff...udent-fees

State system legislation to reduce/regulate athletic student fees.

"ODU essentially has... to meet the 55 percent limit, which President John Broderick said is reasonable. According to a USA Today data base of athletic budgets, ODU funded about 73 percent of its athletic budget through student fees in 2012-2013."

It's one thing if the fees were imposed on the students without their consent. In that case, I can see putting a cap on the fees.

But if the students vote fees on themselves that fund the athletic department 100%, it doesn't matter! The students have spoken, and that's that.


The legislation is wrong, if it isn't smart enough to differentiate between the two obviously different cases.

Maybe, but students matriculate rapidly (at least we hope they do). Should students in 2015 be made to pay student fees that were voted on by students in 2010, when most of those students are now gone? Should a university have to pole students every four years for approval of fees? Its a very fluid situation....

Why is it different than how our laws work now?

We don't pole citizens every year if they still agree that a law should be a law.

If enough people decide, one day, that a current law is no longer valid, they will urge their elected representative to amend or repeal the law.


Likewise, if students at the university no longer wish to pay such a fee, they can urge their elected student representative to repeal the fee.

(08-26-2015 08:38 AM)FrancisDrake Wrote:  Maybe, but students matriculate rapidly (at least we hope they do). Should students in 2015 be made to pay student fees that were voted on by students in 2010, when most of those students are now gone? Should a university have to pole students every four years for approval of fees? Its a very fluid situation....

Yeah, when a student is elected president of the student association, for example, they don't automatically hold that position for life. There's a new election every year, because, of course, the student body changes substantially every year.

Maybe there should be "term limits" on "student activity fees". For example, if students vote in those fees, the fees should expire after three years and are only continued if the fees win a majority in another election.

At the very least, university students should be able to vote on repealing student fees that were enacted in previous years, by getting enough signatures on petitions to hold an election.

(08-21-2015 11:31 AM)gulfcoastgal Wrote:  ETA: Messed up on Hawaii ... listed under Big West ... never heard of Big West ... apologies.

Hawaii is FB-only in the MWC. It plays its Olympic sports in the Big West, and where you play your BBall is your "home" conference in Div1.

The Wikipedia machine tells us that the Big West full members are is Cal Poly SLO, Cal State Fullerton+, Cal State Northridge, Hawaii, Long Beach State+, UC Davis, UC Irvine+, UC Riverside and UC Santa Barbara+, with Sac State an affiliate in men's soccer. (+ the four current members from before 1980)

So four Cal State system schools, four U Cal system schools, plus Hawaii, which moved from the WAC to the Big West for Olympic Sports when the WAC dropped FBS football.

It seen a lot of turnover over the years, with non-California schools added in various realignment moves not staying around. Northern Illinois was a member at one time, before the Big West dropped FCS FB and before Northern Illinois climbed out of FCS back to FBS.

~~~~~~~~~~~~~
PS. It's poll. A pole is a long stick.

As an aside BruceMcF, at one point UC Santa Barbara was in the Big West with North Texas and Boise for all-sports.

(08-26-2015 11:53 AM)Wedge Wrote:  

(08-26-2015 08:38 AM)FrancisDrake Wrote:  Maybe, but students matriculate rapidly (at least we hope they do). Should students in 2015 be made to pay student fees that were voted on by students in 2010, when most of those students are now gone? Should a university have to pole students every four years for approval of fees? Its a very fluid situation....

Yeah, when a student is elected president of the student association, for example, they don't automatically hold that position for life. There's a new election every year, because, of course, the student body changes substantially every year.

Maybe there should be "term limits" on "student activity fees". For example, if students vote in those fees, the fees should expire after three years and are only continued if the fees win a majority in another election.

At the very least, university students should be able to vote on repealing student fees that were enacted in previous years, by getting enough signatures on petitions to hold an election.

Post #23.

Your last sentence is valid.

(08-26-2015 12:33 PM)jdgaucho Wrote:  As an aside BruceMcF, at one point UC Santa Barbara was in the Big West with North Texas and Boise for all-sports.

Another interesting aside: the Big West could potentially have UCSB and CSUB. Same letters. Maybe same colors, too?

(08-26-2015 01:28 PM)MplsBison Wrote:  

(08-26-2015 11:53 AM)Wedge Wrote:  

(08-26-2015 08:38 AM)FrancisDrake Wrote:  Maybe, but students matriculate rapidly (at least we hope they do). Should students in 2015 be made to pay student fees that were voted on by students in 2010, when most of those students are now gone? Should a university have to pole students every four years for approval of fees? Its a very fluid situation....

Yeah, when a student is elected president of the student association, for example, they don't automatically hold that position for life. There's a new election every year, because, of course, the student body changes substantially every year.

Maybe there should be "term limits" on "student activity fees". For example, if students vote in those fees, the fees should expire after three years and are only continued if the fees win a majority in another election.

At the very least, university students should be able to vote on repealing student fees that were enacted in previous years, by getting enough signatures on petitions to hold an election.

Post #23.

Your last sentence is valid.

Somewhat true, but we vote on laws that will affect us for possibly our whole lives, students vote on fees that affect them for maybe 4 years.

(08-27-2015 11:41 AM)FrancisDrake Wrote:  

(08-26-2015 01:28 PM)MplsBison Wrote:  

(08-26-2015 11:53 AM)Wedge Wrote:  

(08-26-2015 08:38 AM)FrancisDrake Wrote:  Maybe, but students matriculate rapidly (at least we hope they do). Should students in 2015 be made to pay student fees that were voted on by students in 2010, when most of those students are now gone? Should a university have to pole students every four years for approval of fees? Its a very fluid situation....

Yeah, when a student is elected president of the student association, for example, they don't automatically hold that position for life. There's a new election every year, because, of course, the student body changes substantially every year.

Maybe there should be "term limits" on "student activity fees". For example, if students vote in those fees, the fees should expire after three years and are only continued if the fees win a majority in another election.

At the very least, university students should be able to vote on repealing student fees that were enacted in previous years, by getting enough signatures on petitions to hold an election.

Post #23.

Your last sentence is valid.

Somewhat true, but we vote on laws that will affect us for possibly our whole lives, students vote on fees that affect them for maybe 4 years.

People vote on laws and then immigrate to another country.

This is how our system works.

(08-26-2015 12:09 PM)BruceMcF Wrote:  

(08-21-2015 11:31 AM)gulfcoastgal Wrote:  ETA: Messed up on Hawaii ... listed under Big West ... never heard of Big West ... apologies.

Hawaii is FB-only in the MWC. It plays its Olympic sports in the Big West, and where you play your BBall is your "home" conference in Div1.

The Wikipedia machine tells us that the Big West full members are is Cal Poly SLO, Cal State Fullerton+, Cal State Northridge, Hawaii, Long Beach State+, UC Davis, UC Irvine+, UC Riverside and UC Santa Barbara+, with Sac State an affiliate in men's soccer. (+ the four current members from before 1980)

So four Cal State system schools, four U Cal system schools, plus Hawaii, which moved from the WAC to the Big West for Olympic Sports when the WAC dropped FBS football.

It seen a lot of turnover over the years, with non-California schools added in various realignment moves not staying around. Northern Illinois was a member at one time, before the Big West dropped FCS FB and before Northern Illinois climbed out of FCS back to FBS.

~~~~~~~~~~~~~
PS. It's poll. A pole is a long stick.

The Big West was a 1-A / FBS conference when Northern Illinois joined as a FB-only member in the 90s.

(08-27-2015 02:06 PM)MplsBison Wrote:  

(08-27-2015 11:41 AM)FrancisDrake Wrote:  

(08-26-2015 01:28 PM)MplsBison Wrote:  

(08-26-2015 11:53 AM)Wedge Wrote:  

(08-26-2015 08:38 AM)FrancisDrake Wrote:  Maybe, but students matriculate rapidly (at least we hope they do). Should students in 2015 be made to pay student fees that were voted on by students in 2010, when most of those students are now gone? Should a university have to pole students every four years for approval of fees? Its a very fluid situation....

Yeah, when a student is elected president of the student association, for example, they don't automatically hold that position for life. There's a new election every year, because, of course, the student body changes substantially every year.

Maybe there should be "term limits" on "student activity fees". For example, if students vote in those fees, the fees should expire after three years and are only continued if the fees win a majority in another election.

At the very least, university students should be able to vote on repealing student fees that were enacted in previous years, by getting enough signatures on petitions to hold an election.

Post #23.

Your last sentence is valid.

Somewhat true, but we vote on laws that will affect us for possibly our whole lives, students vote on fees that affect them for maybe 4 years.

People vote on laws and then immigrate to another country.

This is how our system works.

The population of a city, county, state, or country does not have a 90% turnover rate in four years.

(08-28-2015 10:29 AM)FrancisDrake Wrote:  

(08-27-2015 02:06 PM)MplsBison Wrote:  People vote on laws and then immigrate to another country.

This is how our system works.

The population of a city, county, state, or country does not have a 90% turnover rate in four years.

And its not unusual nowadays for a number of laws to have a sunset provision, requiring renewal every ten to twenty years to remain in place.

~~~~~~~~~~~~~

(08-27-2015 03:10 PM)jdgaucho Wrote:  The Big West was a 1-A / FBS conference when Northern Illinois joined as a FB-only member in the 90s.

Oops, sorry about that. Thanks for the correction.

(08-28-2015 10:29 AM)FrancisDrake Wrote:  

(08-27-2015 02:06 PM)MplsBison Wrote:  

(08-27-2015 11:41 AM)FrancisDrake Wrote:  

(08-26-2015 01:28 PM)MplsBison Wrote:  

(08-26-2015 11:53 AM)Wedge Wrote:  Yeah, when a student is elected president of the student association, for example, they don't automatically hold that position for life. There's a new election every year, because, of course, the student body changes substantially every year.

Maybe there should be "term limits" on "student activity fees". For example, if students vote in those fees, the fees should expire after three years and are only continued if the fees win a majority in another election.

At the very least, university students should be able to vote on repealing student fees that were enacted in previous years, by getting enough signatures on petitions to hold an election.

Post #23.

Your last sentence is valid.

Somewhat true, but we vote on laws that will affect us for possibly our whole lives, students vote on fees that affect them for maybe 4 years.

People vote on laws and then immigrate to another country.

This is how our system works.

The population of a city, county, state, or country does not have a 90% turnover rate in four years.

What about laws that have been around longer than four years?

I'm certain that there are laws on the books now that either no one alive today voted on or no one alive today voted for the representative that helped push the law through.


I'm afraid there's no way for you to argue against it, other than to arbitrary decide that the situation is different and thus warrants a bogus policy limiting funding from student fees to less than some arbitrary level.

(08-28-2015 01:38 PM)MplsBison Wrote:  

(08-28-2015 10:29 AM)FrancisDrake Wrote:  

(08-27-2015 02:06 PM)MplsBison Wrote:  

(08-27-2015 11:41 AM)FrancisDrake Wrote:  

(08-26-2015 01:28 PM)MplsBison Wrote:  Post #23.

Your last sentence is valid.

Somewhat true, but we vote on laws that will affect us for possibly our whole lives, students vote on fees that affect them for maybe 4 years.

People vote on laws and then immigrate to another country.

This is how our system works.

The population of a city, county, state, or country does not have a 90% turnover rate in four years.

What about laws that have been around longer than four years?

I'm certain that there are laws on the books now that either no one alive today voted on or no one alive today voted for the representative that helped push the law through.


I'm afraid there's no way for you to argue against it, other than to arbitrary decide that the situation is different and thus warrants a bogus policy limiting funding from student fees to less than some arbitrary level.

If you consider the differences between voting for athletic student fees in college and the changing of state or federal law arbitrary well then that is your right. I do not. There are similarities but there are also stark differences.

(08-18-2015 05:35 PM)bullet Wrote:  

(08-18-2015 02:11 PM)stxrunner Wrote:  

(08-18-2015 12:47 PM)Attackcoog Wrote:  Long article with charts listing FCOA for most colleges. It discusses the effects and issues connected with the new rules. One interesting passage---


Referencing conversations at the Division I Strategic Summit and board meetings two weeks ago in Indianapolis, Schulz said "there is certainly some active discussion among some of the (school) presidents" about Division I membership requirements. At present, among other things, schools must have teams in 14 sports to be in Division I, 16 to be in the FBS.

"I think there needs to be some dialogue about what does it mean to be a Division I member," Schulz said. With many schools viewing continued access to the Division I men's basketball tournament as critical, he added, "there may be some ways to say we're still going to want to have people sponsor a certain number of sports at what we're going to call a Division I level. They may be funded differently."



http://www.usatoday.com/story/sports/col.../31904839/

Avg G5 Additional Spending: $0.42M
Avg P5 Additional Spending: $1.06M

Avg G5 2013-2014 Expenses: $28.742M
Avg P5 2013-2014 Expenses: $90.547M

Top 10 P5 Additional Spenders:
1) Auburn $2.10M
2) Wisconsin $2.00M
2) Florida State $2.00M
4) Penn State $1.75M
5) Tennessee $1.70M
6) Ohio State $1.65M
7) Texas $1.60M
7) LSU $1.60M
9) South Carolina $1.40M
9) Ole Miss $1.40M
9) Mississippi St $1.40M


Top 10 G5 Additional Spenders:
1) Boise State $1.20M
1) Fresno State $1.20M
3) San Jose St $1.00M
4) South Alabma $0.90M
5) Toledo $0.85M
6) Arkansas St $0.82M
7) Utah State $0.80M
7) Ball State $0.80M
9) South Florida $0.75M
9) Houston $0.75M
9) Ohio $0.75M
9) Northern Ill $0.75M


Top 10 P5 Expenditures:
1) Texas $154.1M
2) Michigan $142.6M
3) Auburn $126.5M
4) Wisconsin $125.1M
5) LSU $122.9M
6) Penn St $117.4M
7) Ohio St $113.9M
8) Oregon $110.4M
9) Florida $109.7M
10) Oklahoma St $109.6M

Top 10 G5 Expenditures:
1) Cincinnati $55.4M
2) New Mexico $47.1M
3) South Florida $46.8M
4) Boise State $45.7M
5) San Diego St $45.1M
6) Hawaii $43.1M
7) Old Dominion $41.1M
8) Houston $39.5M
9) East Carolina $38.7M
10) Colorado St $36.9M

This is just for the schools that have data linked above. Obviously a few schools missing, notably for the G5 ranks, UConn, who I believe would rank the highest in G5 expenditures if not for the omission.

UConn, BYU and UNLV would all be above Cincinnati.

UCF has expenditures above 40 mil as well. poorly done article.

BYU will pay $4,500 in COA for its athletes. And with 21 sports and roughly 632 athletes that is a hefty bill ($2.844 mill by my quick math if that went to all sports/athletes). But it is what they feel they need to do to remain competitive.
http://www.sltrib.com/sports/2465529-155...y-4500-for

(08-28-2015 03:12 PM)FrancisDrake Wrote:  

(08-28-2015 01:38 PM)MplsBison Wrote:  

(08-28-2015 10:29 AM)FrancisDrake Wrote:  

(08-27-2015 02:06 PM)MplsBison Wrote:  

(08-27-2015 11:41 AM)FrancisDrake Wrote:  Somewhat true, but we vote on laws that will affect us for possibly our whole lives, students vote on fees that affect them for maybe 4 years.

People vote on laws and then immigrate to another country.

This is how our system works.

The population of a city, county, state, or country does not have a 90% turnover rate in four years.

What about laws that have been around longer than four years?

I'm certain that there are laws on the books now that either no one alive today voted on or no one alive today voted for the representative that helped push the law through.


I'm afraid there's no way for you to argue against it, other than to arbitrary decide that the situation is different and thus warrants a bogus policy limiting funding from student fees to less than some arbitrary level.

If you consider the differences between voting for athletic student fees in college and the changing of state or federal law arbitrary well then that is your right. I do not. There are similarities but there are also stark differences.

There aren't any differences in how voting policy works in this country.

It's a cop out to say "oh ... well ... it's different because it's different ... so we're going to enact completely different voting policy than the rest of the country does for everything else."

(08-29-2015 09:20 AM)f1do Wrote:  BYU will pay $4,500 in COA for its athletes. And with 21 sports and roughly 632 athletes that is a hefty bill ($2.844 mill by my quick math if that went to all sports/athletes). But it is what they feel they need to do to remain competitive.
http://www.sltrib.com/sports/2465529-155...y-4500-for

Truly, any school that claims to offer a "full" scholarship should be paying the athlete the actual, full costs of attending the school.

Good for BYU, and all schools providing FCOA.

(08-29-2015 09:33 AM)MplsBison Wrote:  

(08-29-2015 09:20 AM)f1do Wrote:  BYU will pay $4,500 in COA for its athletes. And with 21 sports and roughly 632 athletes that is a hefty bill ($2.844 mill by my quick math if that went to all sports/athletes). But it is what they feel they need to do to remain competitive.
http://www.sltrib.com/sports/2465529-155...y-4500-for

Truly, any school that claims to offer a "full" scholarship should be paying the athlete the actual, full costs of attending the school.

Good for BYU, and all schools providing FCOA.

The question is what schools at the FCS level and at D2 level to go FCOAs just so that they can get noticed to move up a step? Lets say North Dakota decides to go FCOAs for all sports including Hockey to keep up with the Big 10? Would they get to move to FBS and leave the Big Sky behind?

Still another article out of the Big Sky that the Commish thinks that all G5 schools will be downgraded to FCS status. I have to laugh at that since many schools are keeping up. He wishes he has Boise State back in the Big Sky. I wonder how long before schools like Eastern Washington will get restless and bolts for the FBS? He is holding the Big Sky schools to fall behind the rest of the FBS.