Hello There, Guest! (LoginRegister)

Post Reply 
Colleges are spending more on their athletes because they can..
Author Message
Bookmark and Share
Hood-rich Offline
Smarter Than the Average Lib
*

Posts: 7,858
Joined: May 2016
Reputation: 418
I Root For: ECU & CSU
Location: The Hood
Post: #11
RE: Colleges are spending more on their athletes because they can..
(07-07-2017 12:05 PM)WKUYG Wrote:  
(07-07-2017 11:40 AM)Hood-rich Wrote:  
(07-07-2017 06:21 AM)monarx Wrote:  
(07-07-2017 05:11 AM)GreenSteve Wrote:  How to do more — or as much — with less

Louisiana Tech athletics director Tommy McClelland said in an interview that athletics departments outside the Power Five conferences recognize they need to do what they can to increase revenue. Their universities — and, in some cases, state governments — are continuing to add to the amounts of money they give to athletics programs from their general funds or through student fees. But McClelland says it’s also a matter of priorities, and he insists that there is no sense of losing ground competitively even though his school spent less on sports in 2016 than any public school in Conference USA, one of the so-called Group of Five conferences.

https://www.usatoday.com/story/sports/co...449433001/

Not the case in VA where athletics is funded primarily through fees and donations and now the state is capping fees. Our state govt takes the attitude that if UVA and VT have everything they want then all is good.

UVA and VT supported themselves via alumni and community participation. They don't need the fees. Before you think about bringing up BCS and ESPN consider this. They were already WAY, WAY ahead before any of that happened.

Neither does anybody else. I applaud what VA is doing. I hope NC does the same even if it "hurts" ECU's athletic department. I'm beyond the point of giving a ****. Students already pay enough without any athletics fees.

While I don't totally disagree with you on this because my son's tuition went up 30% during his 1st and 3rd year at Western and then increased his Sr year.

But there's another way to look at it....

winning sports attract more students to a school. So with more students that is new money coming in each year on their backs. If not for that increase enrollment the increase in cost to each student would probably still increase. So most schools look at the student fees as a investment that pays off by actually, well possibly, saving them money.

With out increase enrollment student will pay just as much if not more..the increase will just go some place else in the school.

How many high school students grow up giving a rip about G5 athletics? Not too many. That theory primarily applies to P5 programs. Even then it's typically the flagships. If a kid doesn't get into Flagship U or Landgrant U I seriously doubt many give a crap after that. If you have any doubt just look at how many people care about G5 after graduation, not many.
(This post was last modified: 07-07-2017 12:26 PM by Hood-rich.)
07-07-2017 12:25 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
WKUYG Away
Heisman
*

Posts: 5,866
Joined: Oct 2012
Reputation: 204
I Root For: WKU
Location:
Post: #12
RE: Colleges are spending more on their athletes because they can..
(07-07-2017 12:25 PM)Hood-rich Wrote:  
(07-07-2017 12:05 PM)WKUYG Wrote:  
(07-07-2017 11:40 AM)Hood-rich Wrote:  
(07-07-2017 06:21 AM)monarx Wrote:  
(07-07-2017 05:11 AM)GreenSteve Wrote:  How to do more — or as much — with less

Louisiana Tech athletics director Tommy McClelland said in an interview that athletics departments outside the Power Five conferences recognize they need to do what they can to increase revenue. Their universities — and, in some cases, state governments — are continuing to add to the amounts of money they give to athletics programs from their general funds or through student fees. But McClelland says it’s also a matter of priorities, and he insists that there is no sense of losing ground competitively even though his school spent less on sports in 2016 than any public school in Conference USA, one of the so-called Group of Five conferences.

https://www.usatoday.com/story/sports/co...449433001/

Not the case in VA where athletics is funded primarily through fees and donations and now the state is capping fees. Our state govt takes the attitude that if UVA and VT have everything they want then all is good.

UVA and VT supported themselves via alumni and community participation. They don't need the fees. Before you think about bringing up BCS and ESPN consider this. They were already WAY, WAY ahead before any of that happened.

Neither does anybody else. I applaud what VA is doing. I hope NC does the same even if it "hurts" ECU's athletic department. I'm beyond the point of giving a ****. Students already pay enough without any athletics fees.

While I don't totally disagree with you on this because my son's tuition went up 30% during his 1st and 3rd year at Western and then increased his Sr year.

But there's another way to look at it....

winning sports attract more students to a school. So with more students that is new money coming in each year on their backs. If not for that increase enrollment the increase in cost to each student would probably still increase. So most schools look at the student fees as a investment that pays off by actually, well possibly, saving them money.

With out increase enrollment student will pay just as much if not more..the increase will just go some place else in the school.

How many high school students grow up giving a rip about G5 athletics? Not too many. That theory primarily applies to P5 programs. Even then it's typically the flagships. If a kid doesn't get into Flagship U or Landgrant U I seriously doubt many give a crap after that. If you have any doubt just look at how many people care about G5 after graduation, not many.

All I know is Western has done studies on this and it showed increased enrollment. Also in I believe 1996 Western was one vote away from dropping football all together. Then a professor did the study that showed the value of playing football (losing football) was greater to the school than the amount spent on it.

Western had record number of student for I believe 5 years following the announced move from FCS TO BCS. The numbers before 2007 were almost flat-lined the previous few years. Last year was a decrease in enrollment ...tuition is also at a record high. So money does play a factor and we are seeing the breaking point.

Western has hit a ceiling and time to tighten their belts on spending. So as I said I don't totally disagree with you. But I also see a value in the fees. Fees voted on by the students at Western.
07-07-2017 12:48 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
Hood-rich Offline
Smarter Than the Average Lib
*

Posts: 7,858
Joined: May 2016
Reputation: 418
I Root For: ECU & CSU
Location: The Hood
Post: #13
RE: Colleges are spending more on their athletes because they can..
(07-07-2017 12:48 PM)WKUYG Wrote:  Fees voted on by the students at Western.

Do they vote for them every year? Do they ALL vote?
(This post was last modified: 07-07-2017 12:49 PM by Hood-rich.)
07-07-2017 12:49 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
WKUYG Away
Heisman
*

Posts: 5,866
Joined: Oct 2012
Reputation: 204
I Root For: WKU
Location:
Post: #14
RE: Colleges are spending more on their athletes because they can..
(07-07-2017 12:49 PM)Hood-rich Wrote:  
(07-07-2017 12:48 PM)WKUYG Wrote:  Fees voted on by the students at Western.

Do they vote for them every year? Do they ALL vote?

No.

But just like all tuition money the student KNOW how much student fees are costing them. So they do have choices just we all make in life. My guess those that choose to attend Western see a value in it even with the student fees.

Not all students enjoy sports but even less take part in the clubs and other non popular courses at a school. All of that cost goes into the tuition each student pays. So that's no different than those that don't value their fees for sports
07-07-2017 12:59 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
SICemDAWGS! Offline
Bench Warmer
*

Posts: 223
Joined: Jan 2015
Reputation: 36
I Root For: Louisiana Tech
Location:
Post: #15
RE: Colleges are spending more on their athletes because they can..
(07-07-2017 11:13 AM)eager eagle Wrote:  No, the rule change 3-4yrs ago referenced STUDENT ATHLETIC FEES and had nothing to do with athletic facilities. Prior to then a school could NOT charge a student athletic fee but can at this time if approved by student vote.

The student FACILITY ENHANCEMENT FEE, in effect for next 21yrs or so, IS reflected in the current annual operating budget. The annual payment on the bonds of about $600,000 is taken from the facility enhancement fee kitty and listed as an expense on Techs statement of revenue expenses.

While called an "athletic fee" the rule change 3-4 years ago would count dollar for dollar against the allowed transfer limit from the general fund. So in principle it's not an athletic fee at all. Other schools in other states are allowed to transfer monies on top of imposed student fees, while Louisiana schools essentially can only have x amount from transfer and student fees combined.

I agree that the passing of an "athletic fee" at any school would be difficult right now in La. With the economic and political climate holding colleges for ransom in an effort to extort more money from the citizens a concerted effort in opposition to a fee would most likely be successful. Nothing against a particular school, but with uncertainty in regards to TOPS and with tuition going up annually to make up for government shortfalls it is a lot to ask of students.
(This post was last modified: 07-07-2017 02:20 PM by SICemDAWGS!.)
07-07-2017 02:19 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
LaTechBanjo Offline
Special Teams
*

Posts: 504
Joined: Nov 2011
Reputation: 32
I Root For: LaTech
Location:
Post: #16
RE: Colleges are spending more on their athletes because they can..
(07-07-2017 11:13 AM)eager eagle Wrote:  No, the rule change 3-4yrs ago referenced STUDENT ATHLETIC FEES and had nothing to do with athletic facilities. Prior to then a school could NOT charge a student athletic fee but can at this time if approved by student vote.

You are correct about the rule change.

The change in policy was adopted unanimously April 25, 2012 according to the BOR meeting minutes. I had to dig there to find it.
(This post was last modified: 07-07-2017 02:33 PM by LaTechBanjo.)
07-07-2017 02:32 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
Nugget49er Online
Special Teams
*

Posts: 786
Joined: May 2012
Reputation: 50
I Root For: Charlotte 49ers
Location:
Post: #17
RE: Colleges are spending more on their athletes because they can..
(07-07-2017 11:40 AM)Hood-rich Wrote:  
(07-07-2017 06:21 AM)monarx Wrote:  
(07-07-2017 05:11 AM)GreenSteve Wrote:  How to do more — or as much — with less

Louisiana Tech athletics director Tommy McClelland said in an interview that athletics departments outside the Power Five conferences recognize they need to do what they can to increase revenue. Their universities — and, in some cases, state governments — are continuing to add to the amounts of money they give to athletics programs from their general funds or through student fees. But McClelland says it’s also a matter of priorities, and he insists that there is no sense of losing ground competitively even though his school spent less on sports in 2016 than any public school in Conference USA, one of the so-called Group of Five conferences.

https://www.usatoday.com/story/sports/co...449433001/

Not the case in VA where athletics is funded primarily through fees and donations and now the state is capping fees. Our state govt takes the attitude that if UVA and VT have everything they want then all is good.

UVA and VT supported themselves via alumni and community participation. They don't need the fees. Before you think about bringing up BCS and ESPN consider this. They were already WAY, WAY ahead before any of that happened.

Neither does anybody else. I applaud what VA is doing. I hope NC does the same even if it "hurts" ECU's athletic department. I'm beyond the point of giving a ****. Students already pay enough without any athletics fees.

I wonder why I never hear anyone suggesting that we eliminate high school sports. If the goal is simply to reduce costs associated with athletics let's start there.
07-10-2017 12:07 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
Post Reply 




User(s) browsing this thread: 1 Guest(s)


Copyright © 2002-2017 Collegiate Sports Nation Bulletin Board System (CSNbbs), All Rights Reserved.
CSNbbs is an independent fan site and is in no way affiliated to the NCAA or any of the schools and conferences it represents.
This site monetizes links. FTC Disclosure.
Powered By MyBB, © 2002-2017 MyBB Group.