(11-16-2015 01:15 PM)CajunFanatico Wrote:  

(11-16-2015 11:35 AM)eaglewraith Wrote:  

Quote:Hank Huckaby, chancellor of the University System of Georgia, was seated near the president in his suite. He said he remains skeptical about the viability of the football program.

He has two degrees from Georgia State and was not a proponent of adding football. His biggest concern is the financial burden on students. He says he fields as many complaints about overall student fees as any issue.

There are several interesting statements in the article, but I thought that was a pretty significant one.

I haven't had a chance to read the entire article, but if there's a more significant comment than that one for GaState football fans, I'd like to see it.

He also not surprisingly has a UGA degree...

(11-16-2015 01:23 PM)panama Wrote:  

(11-16-2015 11:14 AM)ButlerGSU Wrote:  $90 million over five years? Yikes.

...and the University operating budget was $3B in the same time period. This is a poorly written hit piece against G5 athletics by folks that hate college athletics. Funny that we never see articles advocating ending school newspapers, radio stations or health services. I have seen better message forum posts in this subject.

The operating budget has nothing to do with the fact each student leaves with $4000 more debt as a result of the football program. The problem is that none of them go to the game.

(11-16-2015 01:27 PM)panama Wrote:  

(11-16-2015 01:15 PM)CajunFanatico Wrote:  

(11-16-2015 11:35 AM)eaglewraith Wrote:  

Quote:Hank Huckaby, chancellor of the University System of Georgia, was seated near the president in his suite. He said he remains skeptical about the viability of the football program.

He has two degrees from Georgia State and was not a proponent of adding football. His biggest concern is the financial burden on students. He says he fields as many complaints about overall student fees as any issue.

There are several interesting statements in the article, but I thought that was a pretty significant one.

I haven't had a chance to read the entire article, but if there's a more significant comment than that one for GaState football fans, I'd like to see it.

He also not surprisingly has a UGA degree...

Kind of in stark contrast to the confidence boasted here:

(11-06-2015 12:54 PM)panama Wrote:  It's worse than that. What if there is only one bid? :)

The Governor has a bromance with the Mayor

The Lieutenant Governor has three sons that either currently or in the recent past played and or coached at GSU

The Chancellor of the BOR is a GSU grad.

(11-16-2015 01:29 PM)GSU Eagles Wrote:  

(11-16-2015 01:23 PM)panama Wrote:  

(11-16-2015 11:14 AM)ButlerGSU Wrote:  $90 million over five years? Yikes.

...and the University operating budget was $3B in the same time period. This is a poorly written hit piece against G5 athletics by folks that hate college athletics. Funny that we never see articles advocating ending school newspapers, radio stations or health services. I have seen better message forum posts in this subject.

The operating budget has nothing to do with the fact each student leaves with $4000 more debt as a result of the football program. The problem is that none of them go to the game.

Our athletic fees are $271 a semester. $271 X 2 X 4 = $2168 So where is this $4000 number?

(11-16-2015 01:26 PM)GSU Eagles Wrote:  

(11-16-2015 12:53 PM)Ole Sleepy Wrote:  "At Georgia State, athletic fees totaled $17.6 million in 2014, from a student population in which nearly 60 percent qualify for Pell Grants, the federal aid program for low-income students"

"Its student body, though, is especially sensitive to any extra costs. Pell-eligible students have nearly doubled since 2007, from 32 percent to 59 percent. And in 2012, more than 14,000 Georgia State students had unmet financial need, in some cases more than $15,000 a year. Despite efforts to create a more traditional college atmosphere, about three-fourths of Georgia State students still commute to campus, including many who attend part-time at night. (All fees, including those for athletics, are prorated for students who take fewer than six credit hours.)"

Sounds to me like the federal government is subsidizing a football program.

Maybe Becker figures the Federal Govt is going to waive student debt so he is not too concerned with loading students from low income families with even more debt.

Considering that the only school in the Sun Belt to be less than 50% subsidized is ULL... Grab a paddle buddy. You're in the boat with us.

(11-16-2015 01:43 PM)StanMolsonMan Wrote:  

(11-16-2015 01:29 PM)GSU Eagles Wrote:  

(11-16-2015 01:23 PM)panama Wrote:  

(11-16-2015 11:14 AM)ButlerGSU Wrote:  $90 million over five years? Yikes.

...and the University operating budget was $3B in the same time period. This is a poorly written hit piece against G5 athletics by folks that hate college athletics. Funny that we never see articles advocating ending school newspapers, radio stations or health services. I have seen better message forum posts in this subject.

The operating budget has nothing to do with the fact each student leaves with $4000 more debt as a result of the football program. The problem is that none of them go to the game.

Our athletic fees are $271 a semester. $271 X 2 X 4 = $2168 So where is this $4000 number?

Most people don't graduate in 4 years. But the point remains the students leave school with extra debt and they never attended a game.

(11-16-2015 01:37 PM)eaglewraith Wrote:  

(11-16-2015 01:27 PM)panama Wrote:  

(11-16-2015 01:15 PM)CajunFanatico Wrote:  

(11-16-2015 11:35 AM)eaglewraith Wrote:  

Quote:Hank Huckaby, chancellor of the University System of Georgia, was seated near the president in his suite. He said he remains skeptical about the viability of the football program.

He has two degrees from Georgia State and was not a proponent of adding football. His biggest concern is the financial burden on students. He says he fields as many complaints about overall student fees as any issue.

There are several interesting statements in the article, but I thought that was a pretty significant one.

I haven't had a chance to read the entire article, but if there's a more significant comment than that one for GaState football fans, I'd like to see it.

He also not surprisingly has a UGA degree...

Kind of in stark contrast to the confidence boasted here:

(11-06-2015 12:54 PM)panama Wrote:  It's worse than that. What if there is only one bid? :)

The Governor has a bromance with the Mayor

The Lieutenant Governor has three sons that either currently or in the recent past played and or coached at GSU

The Chancellor of the BOR is a GSU grad.

Four more days... then the real fun begins.

(11-16-2015 01:46 PM)StanMolsonMan Wrote:  

(11-16-2015 01:26 PM)GSU Eagles Wrote:  

(11-16-2015 12:53 PM)Ole Sleepy Wrote:  "At Georgia State, athletic fees totaled $17.6 million in 2014, from a student population in which nearly 60 percent qualify for Pell Grants, the federal aid program for low-income students"

"Its student body, though, is especially sensitive to any extra costs. Pell-eligible students have nearly doubled since 2007, from 32 percent to 59 percent. And in 2012, more than 14,000 Georgia State students had unmet financial need, in some cases more than $15,000 a year. Despite efforts to create a more traditional college atmosphere, about three-fourths of Georgia State students still commute to campus, including many who attend part-time at night. (All fees, including those for athletics, are prorated for students who take fewer than six credit hours.)"

Sounds to me like the federal government is subsidizing a football program.

Maybe Becker figures the Federal Govt is going to waive student debt so he is not too concerned with loading students from low income families with even more debt.

Considering that the only school in the Sun Belt to be less than 50% subsidized is ULL... Grab a paddle buddy. You're in the boat with us.

Our students go to the games and they recently voted to increase fees. Yes, GaSt voted long ago to add football, but you'd have to wonder today how they would vote on fees.

(11-16-2015 01:46 PM)StanMolsonMan Wrote:  Considering that the only school in the Sun Belt to be less than 50% subsidized is ULL... Grab a paddle buddy. You're in the boat with us.

Is my memory failing, or are we not less than 30% subsidized?

(11-16-2015 01:49 PM)GSU Eagles Wrote:  

(11-16-2015 01:43 PM)StanMolsonMan Wrote:  

(11-16-2015 01:29 PM)GSU Eagles Wrote:  

(11-16-2015 01:23 PM)panama Wrote:  

(11-16-2015 11:14 AM)ButlerGSU Wrote:  $90 million over five years? Yikes.

...and the University operating budget was $3B in the same time period. This is a poorly written hit piece against G5 athletics by folks that hate college athletics. Funny that we never see articles advocating ending school newspapers, radio stations or health services. I have seen better message forum posts in this subject.

The operating budget has nothing to do with the fact each student leaves with $4000 more debt as a result of the football program. The problem is that none of them go to the game.

Our athletic fees are $271 a semester. $271 X 2 X 4 = $2168 So where is this $4000 number?

Most people don't graduate in 4 years. But the point remains the students leave school with extra debt and they never attended a game.

Yep. And if you are part time, you don't pay the same amount. So $4000 was a shock number. Fine. Say 5. It is $2710. Still not $4000. Southern for the same time period is about $500 less total. If the team is winning, the students go. Unfortunately, we have been a loser for an entire college cycle for some. We are just now starting a freshman program introducing students to our athletics. From here on out, if they don't go, it is their choice.

(11-16-2015 01:50 PM)CajunFanatico Wrote:  

(11-16-2015 01:46 PM)StanMolsonMan Wrote:  Considering that the only school in the Sun Belt to be less than 50% subsidized is ULL... Grab a paddle buddy. You're in the boat with us.

Is my memory failing, or are we not less than 30% subsidized?

According to Huff Post, 40%

http://projects.huffingtonpost.com/proje...-lafayette

Quick word of caution…this report comes from the Chronicle of Higher Education. If you are familiar with it as I am, you know that they have a real stick up their *** when it comes to college athletics. Someone needs to make a sweaty guy meme with one button saying "colleges exaggerate athletic revenues to avoid paying exploited athletes" and the other "athletics is supported by large amounts of money that could go to academics".

Anyways, I take any reports about expenses and revenues of athletics with a big grain of salt. There is no standard method of accounting between states or institutions and there is metric ton of wiggle room for creative accounting. I especially love the idea of counting athlete's scholarships as expenses when that's either the school paying itself or athletics donations supporting academics.

Athletics are a convenient scapegoat for runaway college costs (even though they have been around since families with one working parent could put multiple kids through college without any aid) and we as fans of non-major athletic programs need to try and resist the scapegoating in any way we can by arming ourselves with knowledge.

Just my 2¢.

(11-16-2015 01:55 PM)StanMolsonMan Wrote:  

(11-16-2015 01:49 PM)GSU Eagles Wrote:  

(11-16-2015 01:43 PM)StanMolsonMan Wrote:  

(11-16-2015 01:29 PM)GSU Eagles Wrote:  

(11-16-2015 01:23 PM)panama Wrote:  ...and the University operating budget was $3B in the same time period. This is a poorly written hit piece against G5 athletics by folks that hate college athletics. Funny that we never see articles advocating ending school newspapers, radio stations or health services. I have seen better message forum posts in this subject.

The operating budget has nothing to do with the fact each student leaves with $4000 more debt as a result of the football program. The problem is that none of them go to the game.

Our athletic fees are $271 a semester. $271 X 2 X 4 = $2168 So where is this $4000 number?

Most people don't graduate in 4 years. But the point remains the students leave school with extra debt and they never attended a game.

Yep. And if you are part time, you don't pay the same amount. So $4000 was a shock number. Fine. Say 5. It is $2710. Still not $4000. Southern for the same time period is about $500 less total. If the team is winning, the students go. Unfortunately, we have been a loser for an entire college cycle for some. We are just now starting a freshman program introducing students to our athletics. From here on out, if they don't go, it is their choice

So that hasn't been the case all along? There are still people that don't know there is a football program?

(11-16-2015 02:00 PM)tapate50 Wrote:  

(11-16-2015 01:55 PM)StanMolsonMan Wrote:  

(11-16-2015 01:49 PM)GSU Eagles Wrote:  

(11-16-2015 01:43 PM)StanMolsonMan Wrote:  

(11-16-2015 01:29 PM)GSU Eagles Wrote:  The operating budget has nothing to do with the fact each student leaves with $4000 more debt as a result of the football program. The problem is that none of them go to the game.

Our athletic fees are $271 a semester. $271 X 2 X 4 = $2168 So where is this $4000 number?

Most people don't graduate in 4 years. But the point remains the students leave school with extra debt and they never attended a game.

Yep. And if you are part time, you don't pay the same amount. So $4000 was a shock number. Fine. Say 5. It is $2710. Still not $4000. Southern for the same time period is about $500 less total. If the team is winning, the students go. Unfortunately, we have been a loser for an entire college cycle for some. We are just now starting a freshman program introducing students to our athletics. From here on out, if they don't go, it is their choice

So that hasn't been the case all along? There are still people that don't know there is a football program?

You can't latch on to tradition when there isn't any. The powers that be finally figured that out. It is something that has to be built over time.

(11-16-2015 01:49 PM)StanMolsonMan Wrote:  

(11-16-2015 01:37 PM)eaglewraith Wrote:  

(11-16-2015 01:27 PM)panama Wrote:  

(11-16-2015 01:15 PM)CajunFanatico Wrote:  

(11-16-2015 11:35 AM)eaglewraith Wrote:  There are several interesting statements in the article, but I thought that was a pretty significant one.

I haven't had a chance to read the entire article, but if there's a more significant comment than that one for GaState football fans, I'd like to see it.

He also not surprisingly has a UGA degree...

Kind of in stark contrast to the confidence boasted here:

(11-06-2015 12:54 PM)panama Wrote:  It's worse than that. What if there is only one bid? :)

The Governor has a bromance with the Mayor

The Lieutenant Governor has three sons that either currently or in the recent past played and or coached at GSU

The Chancellor of the BOR is a GSU grad.

Four more days... then the real fun begins.

Never for one second doubted that Gast would get the property itself in support of its academic mission. It'll be a great get for you, and very good for the growth of your school. The improvements for the surrounding neighborhoods will be great too.

(11-16-2015 01:57 PM)StanMolsonMan Wrote:  

(11-16-2015 01:50 PM)CajunFanatico Wrote:  

(11-16-2015 01:46 PM)StanMolsonMan Wrote:  Considering that the only school in the Sun Belt to be less than 50% subsidized is ULL... Grab a paddle buddy. You're in the boat with us.

Is my memory failing, or are we not less than 30% subsidized?

According to Huff Post, 40%

http://projects.huffingtonpost.com/proje...-lafayette

According to this site, 26.5%

http://chronicle.com/interactives/ncaa-s...table_2014

(11-16-2015 02:06 PM)CajunFanatico Wrote:  

(11-16-2015 01:57 PM)StanMolsonMan Wrote:  

(11-16-2015 01:50 PM)CajunFanatico Wrote:  

(11-16-2015 01:46 PM)StanMolsonMan Wrote:  Considering that the only school in the Sun Belt to be less than 50% subsidized is ULL... Grab a paddle buddy. You're in the boat with us.

Is my memory failing, or are we not less than 30% subsidized?

According to Huff Post, 40%

http://projects.huffingtonpost.com/proje...-lafayette

According to this site, 26.5%

http://chronicle.com/interactives/ncaa-s...table_2014

Nicely done. I guess the Huff Post needs to check their math.

(11-16-2015 02:08 PM)StanMolsonMan Wrote:  

(11-16-2015 02:06 PM)CajunFanatico Wrote:  

(11-16-2015 01:57 PM)StanMolsonMan Wrote:  

(11-16-2015 01:50 PM)CajunFanatico Wrote:  

(11-16-2015 01:46 PM)StanMolsonMan Wrote:  Considering that the only school in the Sun Belt to be less than 50% subsidized is ULL... Grab a paddle buddy. You're in the boat with us.

Is my memory failing, or are we not less than 30% subsidized?

According to Huff Post, 40%

http://projects.huffingtonpost.com/proje...-lafayette

According to this site, 26.5%

http://chronicle.com/interactives/ncaa-s...table_2014

Nicely done. I guess the Huff Post needs to check their math.

I believe that number, 26.5%, comes directly from a La State Legislative audit report.

BTW, there's a bunch of Belt schools that exceed 70%.

Here is the subsidy breakdown by school in 2014

Louisiana at Lafayette - 26.5%
Idaho - 49.6%
Arkansas State - 52.8%
Appalachian State - 53%
Arkansas at Little Rock - 64.6%
New Mexico State - 69.5%
Georgia Southern - 71.6%
Troy - 72.4%
Texas State - 73.2%
Georgia State - 76.4%
South Alabama - 77.4%
Texas at Arlington - 86.2%

Woah, take a quick look down at LSU. WOW wish we had "Other" as 69 million dollars haha must be nice