Hello There, Guest! (LoginRegister)


Post Reply 
OT: WKU Regents recommend to cut 1.3 million from athletic budget
Author Message
Bookmark and Share
Tealblood Offline
Special Teams
*

Posts: 699
Joined: Sep 2015
Reputation: 7
I Root For: CCU
Location:
Post: #41
RE: OT: WKU Regents recommend to cut 1.3 million from athletic budget
Column 6-school funds

8,983,643

Where does that come from? Students whether directly or indirectly it is from students

So basically another 450 per year per student
02-27-2018 05:59 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
Georgia_Power_Company Offline
All American
*

Posts: 4,481
Joined: Oct 2013
Reputation: 122
I Root For: GA Southern
Location: Statesboro GA
Post: #42
RE: OT: WKU Regents recommend to cut 1.3 million from athletic budget
(02-27-2018 05:21 PM)TrueBlueDrew Wrote:  
(02-27-2018 04:54 PM)Tealblood Wrote:  
(02-27-2018 11:15 AM)trueeagle98 Wrote:  
(02-27-2018 09:52 AM)Tealblood Wrote:  Do the math it is a much bigger number

Ok, do the math. Institutional funds are a different matter. And consist of tax funds from the state. Also the amounts paid per student vary greatly by school, state, and student population.

I am going to guess Ga Southern’s athletic budget is about 24 million- I’m not going to look it up

You have roughly 20,000 students

Dividing 24 mil by 20,000=$1,200 per student
Breaking down the $1,200 minus $400 per year in fees
That means students are funding $800 a year in direct institutional support

All number are rough estimates

[Image: 58lgxcV.jpg]

9.5M / 21k students = ~$450

Student Athletic fee: $214
RAC and Expansion fee: $142
Student Activity fee: $100
Total: $456 which includes unlimited access to the RAC, unlimited access to all sports home games, transportation provided for football, and all equipment and registration for all intramural sports

Of course with the take over of Armstrong that number would now be 28k so the budget should be +/- $35 mil for this year.
02-27-2018 06:03 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
TrueBlueDrew Offline
Heisman
*

Posts: 6,551
Joined: Jun 2014
Reputation: 486
I Root For: Jawjuh Suthen
Location: Enemy Turf
Post: #43
RE: OT: WKU Regents recommend to cut 1.3 million from athletic budget
(02-27-2018 05:59 PM)Tealblood Wrote:  Column 6-school funds

8,983,643

Where does that come from? Students whether directly or indirectly it is from students

So basically another 450 per year per student

http://sports.usatoday.com/2017/07/06/me...-database/

“School funds: Includes both direct and indirect support from the university, including state funds, tuition, tuition waivers etc., as well as federal Work Study amounts for student workers employed by athletics department. It also includes the value of university-provided support such as administrative services, facilities and grounds maintenance, security, risk management, utilities, depreciation and debt service that is not charged to the athletics department.”

Regardless, Coastal spent 17M just in school funds your last year in the Big South, so I’m not really sure what point you’re trying to make.
02-27-2018 06:27 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
Tealblood Offline
Special Teams
*

Posts: 699
Joined: Sep 2015
Reputation: 7
I Root For: CCU
Location:
Post: #44
RE: OT: WKU Regents recommend to cut 1.3 million from athletic budget
Just trying to get you to understand that it’s not just the $200 a semester that students are putting into your athletics
02-27-2018 06:53 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
Tealblood Offline
Special Teams
*

Posts: 699
Joined: Sep 2015
Reputation: 7
I Root For: CCU
Location:
Post: #45
RE: OT: WKU Regents recommend to cut 1.3 million from athletic budget
(02-27-2018 06:03 PM)Georgia_Power_Company Wrote:  
(02-27-2018 05:21 PM)TrueBlueDrew Wrote:  
(02-27-2018 04:54 PM)Tealblood Wrote:  
(02-27-2018 11:15 AM)trueeagle98 Wrote:  
(02-27-2018 09:52 AM)Tealblood Wrote:  Do the math it is a much bigger number

Ok, do the math. Institutional funds are a different matter. And consist of tax funds from the state. Also the amounts paid per student vary greatly by school, state, and student population.

I am going to guess Ga Southern’s athletic budget is about 24 million- I’m not going to look it up

You have roughly 20,000 students

Dividing 24 mil by 20,000=$1,200 per student
Breaking down the $1,200 minus $400 per year in fees
That means students are funding $800 a year in direct institutional support

All number are rough estimates

[Image: 58lgxcV.jpg]

9.5M / 21k students = ~$450

Student Athletic fee: $214
RAC and Expansion fee: $142
Student Activity fee: $100
Total: $456 which includes unlimited access to the RAC, unlimited access to all sports home games, transportation provided for football, and all equipment and registration for all intramural sports

Of course with the take over of Armstrong that number would now be 28k so the budget should be +/- $35 mil for this year.


Not sure you will be able to capture all of that just with adding Armstrong

The state legislature capped the amount of growth to your overall athletic budget to keep that from happening

I remember Cobb at Ga St being upset his budget didn’t almost double when they absorbed the other school outside of Atlanta( perimeter???)
02-27-2018 07:00 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
Fanther Offline
Bench Warmer
*

Posts: 168
Joined: Mar 2014
Reputation: 2
I Root For: GSU
Location:
Post: #46
RE: OT: WKU Regents recommend to cut 1.3 million from athletic budget
When the FBI finishes its investigation of basketball and then does the same for football, college athletics is going to hit something akin to the Great Depression.
02-27-2018 07:42 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
Tom in Lazybrook Offline
Hall of Famer
*

Posts: 22,299
Joined: Jul 2011
Reputation: 446
I Root For: So Alabama, GWU
Location: Houston
Post: #47
RE: OT: WKU Regents recommend to cut 1.3 million from athletic budget
(02-25-2018 10:39 PM)EigenEagle Wrote:  
(02-25-2018 10:25 PM)AlwaysSunny Wrote:  
(02-25-2018 09:24 PM)EigenEagle Wrote:  Guess they overestimated how much their marketz were worth in their TV deal.

If that's what you get out of this.. then, well nvm. There will be many more G5 schools that cut budgets when their students start rebelling against funding athletics with out of proportion athletics fees.

When students are going to pay mid four figures a semester to attend classes, they aren't going to revolt over $200 in athletic fees.

Its not 200 a year in athletic fees. The subsidy is a LOT higher at many of our schools. Whether they properly name the fee or not, the money has to come from somewhere. Take the AD budget, subtract out revenue and donations to the AD, then divide the remainder by the number of students.
(This post was last modified: 02-27-2018 09:32 PM by Tom in Lazybrook.)
02-27-2018 09:00 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
trueeagle98 Offline
1st String
*

Posts: 2,307
Joined: Apr 2013
Reputation: 34
I Root For: GS Eagles
Location: the Holy City
Post: #48
RE: OT: WKU Regents recommend to cut 1.3 million from athletic budget
The problem even if you eliminated all fees and institutional support for sports, you will not see your price for tuition go down. The school will just find a new fee and use the freed funds on other projects, salaries, etc...

Part of the reason students seek out schools with a good athletic program is because the want that experience and distraction during the school year. It's not like the fees and tuition is a mystery. Now it is crappy if they change the fees and rates during your tenure. That's why they put it to a vote to see if it would be supported. Sometimes they ignore results, but a lot of times they are used as part of the whole equation.

I would like to see the the percentage go down to below 40% fee subsidy while maintaining budget growth.
02-28-2018 09:00 AM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
trueeagle98 Offline
1st String
*

Posts: 2,307
Joined: Apr 2013
Reputation: 34
I Root For: GS Eagles
Location: the Holy City
Post: #49
RE: OT: WKU Regents recommend to cut 1.3 million from athletic budget
(02-27-2018 07:00 PM)Tealblood Wrote:  
(02-27-2018 06:03 PM)Georgia_Power_Company Wrote:  
(02-27-2018 05:21 PM)TrueBlueDrew Wrote:  
(02-27-2018 04:54 PM)Tealblood Wrote:  
(02-27-2018 11:15 AM)trueeagle98 Wrote:  Ok, do the math. Institutional funds are a different matter. And consist of tax funds from the state. Also the amounts paid per student vary greatly by school, state, and student population.

I am going to guess Ga Southern’s athletic budget is about 24 million- I’m not going to look it up

You have roughly 20,000 students

Dividing 24 mil by 20,000=$1,200 per student
Breaking down the $1,200 minus $400 per year in fees
That means students are funding $800 a year in direct institutional support

All number are rough estimates

[Image: 58lgxcV.jpg]

9.5M / 21k students = ~$450

Student Athletic fee: $214
RAC and Expansion fee: $142
Student Activity fee: $100
Total: $456 which includes unlimited access to the RAC, unlimited access to all sports home games, transportation provided for football, and all equipment and registration for all intramural sports

Of course with the take over of Armstrong that number would now be 28k so the budget should be +/- $35 mil for this year.


Not sure you will be able to capture all of that just with adding Armstrong

The state legislature capped the amount of growth to your overall athletic budget to keep that from happening

I remember Cobb at Ga St being upset his budget didn’t almost double when they absorbed the other school outside of Atlanta( perimeter???)

Yes. I believe there is a 5% per year growth cap for athletic budgets. What GS cold do is implemint an incremental fee over 4 years to slowly increase the budget and get the Savannah campus slowly adjusted. That would be the best way to add the funds and not sticker shock the Armstrong students. Though Armstrong already had an athletic program and budget. Maybe that would be factored into the new total since they combined schools. I don't think the Atl perimeter college had any athletic program/budget so it couldn't be added to GSU's.
02-28-2018 09:05 AM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
Tom in Lazybrook Offline
Hall of Famer
*

Posts: 22,299
Joined: Jul 2011
Reputation: 446
I Root For: So Alabama, GWU
Location: Houston
Post: #50
RE: OT: WKU Regents recommend to cut 1.3 million from athletic budget
(02-28-2018 09:00 AM)trueeagle98 Wrote:  The problem even if you eliminated all fees and institutional support for sports, you will not see your price for tuition go down. The school will just find a new fee and use the freed funds on other projects, salaries, etc...

Part of the reason students seek out schools with a good athletic program is because the want that experience and distraction during the school year. It's not like the fees and tuition is a mystery. Now it is crappy if they change the fees and rates during your tenure. That's why they put it to a vote to see if it would be supported. Sometimes they ignore results, but a lot of times they are used as part of the whole equation.

I would like to see the the percentage go down to below 40% fee subsidy while maintaining budget growth.

That may be true, but the benefits of athletics do not accrue proportionally to the student body. For example, a school with a large number of students at the main campus, schools with large numbers of non-traditional students, etc., might have some issues with ever increasing athletic spending at their expense.

The real issue is to find an appropriate balance.
02-28-2018 09:45 AM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
TrueBlueDrew Offline
Heisman
*

Posts: 6,551
Joined: Jun 2014
Reputation: 486
I Root For: Jawjuh Suthen
Location: Enemy Turf
Post: #51
RE: OT: WKU Regents recommend to cut 1.3 million from athletic budget
(02-28-2018 09:45 AM)Tom in Lazybrook Wrote:  
(02-28-2018 09:00 AM)trueeagle98 Wrote:  The problem even if you eliminated all fees and institutional support for sports, you will not see your price for tuition go down. The school will just find a new fee and use the freed funds on other projects, salaries, etc...

Part of the reason students seek out schools with a good athletic program is because the want that experience and distraction during the school year. It's not like the fees and tuition is a mystery. Now it is crappy if they change the fees and rates during your tenure. That's why they put it to a vote to see if it would be supported. Sometimes they ignore results, but a lot of times they are used as part of the whole equation.

I would like to see the the percentage go down to below 40% fee subsidy while maintaining budget growth.

That may be true, but the benefits of athletics do not accrue proportionally to the student body. For example, a school with a large number of students at the main campus, schools with large numbers of non-traditional students, etc., might have some issues with ever increasing athletic spending at their expense.

The real issue is to find an appropriate balance.

I'd argue that they benefit from going to a D1 school regardless of if they are interested in sports or attend games. It's like paying HOA fees in a subdivision. You might not attend any of the meetings or care that you're in one, but your property value still increases by being a part of it. But I agree, the real issue is finding the line and not crossing it.
02-28-2018 09:55 AM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
McLeansvilleAppFan Offline
1st String
*

Posts: 1,349
Joined: Mar 2013
Reputation: 119
I Root For: Appalachian St
Location: Triad area of NC
Post: #52
RE: OT: WKU Regents recommend to cut 1.3 million from athletic budget
(02-28-2018 09:55 AM)TrueBlueDrew Wrote:  
(02-28-2018 09:45 AM)Tom in Lazybrook Wrote:  
(02-28-2018 09:00 AM)trueeagle98 Wrote:  The problem even if you eliminated all fees and institutional support for sports, you will not see your price for tuition go down. The school will just find a new fee and use the freed funds on other projects, salaries, etc...

Part of the reason students seek out schools with a good athletic program is because the want that experience and distraction during the school year. It's not like the fees and tuition is a mystery. Now it is crappy if they change the fees and rates during your tenure. That's why they put it to a vote to see if it would be supported. Sometimes they ignore results, but a lot of times they are used as part of the whole equation.

I would like to see the the percentage go down to below 40% fee subsidy while maintaining budget growth.

That may be true, but the benefits of athletics do not accrue proportionally to the student body. For example, a school with a large number of students at the main campus, schools with large numbers of non-traditional students, etc., might have some issues with ever increasing athletic spending at their expense.

The real issue is to find an appropriate balance.

I'd argue that they benefit from going to a D1 school regardless of if they are interested in sports or attend games. It's like paying HOA fees in a subdivision. You might not attend any of the meetings or care that you're in one, but your property value still increases by being a part of it. But I agree, the real issue is finding the line and not crossing it.

There are plenty of schools that have good academics and some level of athletics, but there are plenty of schools that go DIII and those are some of the really great schools (MIT comes to mind). I enjoyed some athletic events in my college years, though I have more time now as an alum actually. I appreciate the enjoyment my oldest daughter has with App football (and she is into in big time) and baseball to a lesser extent. However I would be just as happy if those loans she has, and I have, were a few thousand dollars less and that with the interest charged are only growing if it meant sports were non-scholly and/or just intramurals. Sports is really not that big of a benefit or even any benefit. I enjoy my Mountaineer sports but I am not sure I would call it a benefit that really makes the college experience.
02-28-2018 10:48 AM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
Saint3333 Offline
Hall of Famer
*

Posts: 11,412
Joined: Feb 2011
Reputation: 854
I Root For: App State
Location:
Post: #53
RE: OT: WKU Regents recommend to cut 1.3 million from athletic budget
No benefit to the college experience? We had vastly different college experiences.

How often would you visit your alma mater if you didn't attend athletic events? (once your daughter has graduated)
02-28-2018 10:56 AM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
eaglewraith Offline
Heisman
*

Posts: 5,511
Joined: Dec 2012
Reputation: 236
I Root For: GA Southern
Location:
Post: #54
RE: OT: WKU Regents recommend to cut 1.3 million from athletic budget
(02-28-2018 10:56 AM)Saint3333 Wrote:  No benefit to the college experience? We had vastly different college experiences.

How often would you visit your alma mater if you didn't attend athletic events? (once your daughter has graduated)

Sports are how you connect to your alumni base after they leave.

How else are you going to bring thousands of people back all at the same time multiple times a year?

I do agree with others that have said there is a balance that has to be found and you can't exceed it, but just because you personally don't really care for sports doesn't mean it doesn't add value back to the university.
02-28-2018 11:03 AM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
AppinVA Offline
Sun Belt Nationalist
*

Posts: 2,750
Joined: Nov 2011
Reputation: 252
I Root For: Appalachian St.
Location:
Post: #55
RE: OT: WKU Regents recommend to cut 1.3 million from athletic budget
(02-28-2018 11:03 AM)eaglewraith Wrote:  
(02-28-2018 10:56 AM)Saint3333 Wrote:  No benefit to the college experience? We had vastly different college experiences.

How often would you visit your alma mater if you didn't attend athletic events? (once your daughter has graduated)

Sports are how you connect to your alumni base after they leave.

How else are you going to bring thousands of people back all at the same time multiple times a year?

I do agree with others that have said there is a balance that has to be found and you can't exceed it, but just because you personally don't really care for sports doesn't mean it doesn't add value back to the university.

I have a daughter who is a junior in high school. The biggest piece of advice I’ve given her is to go to a school with a football program for this very reason. But I did tell her if she didn’t, she could just come to Boone on football weekends.
02-28-2018 11:08 AM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
TrueBlueDrew Offline
Heisman
*

Posts: 6,551
Joined: Jun 2014
Reputation: 486
I Root For: Jawjuh Suthen
Location: Enemy Turf
Post: #56
RE: OT: WKU Regents recommend to cut 1.3 million from athletic budget
(02-28-2018 10:48 AM)McLeansvilleAppFan Wrote:  
(02-28-2018 09:55 AM)TrueBlueDrew Wrote:  
(02-28-2018 09:45 AM)Tom in Lazybrook Wrote:  
(02-28-2018 09:00 AM)trueeagle98 Wrote:  The problem even if you eliminated all fees and institutional support for sports, you will not see your price for tuition go down. The school will just find a new fee and use the freed funds on other projects, salaries, etc...

Part of the reason students seek out schools with a good athletic program is because the want that experience and distraction during the school year. It's not like the fees and tuition is a mystery. Now it is crappy if they change the fees and rates during your tenure. That's why they put it to a vote to see if it would be supported. Sometimes they ignore results, but a lot of times they are used as part of the whole equation.

I would like to see the the percentage go down to below 40% fee subsidy while maintaining budget growth.

That may be true, but the benefits of athletics do not accrue proportionally to the student body. For example, a school with a large number of students at the main campus, schools with large numbers of non-traditional students, etc., might have some issues with ever increasing athletic spending at their expense.

The real issue is to find an appropriate balance.

I'd argue that they benefit from going to a D1 school regardless of if they are interested in sports or attend games. It's like paying HOA fees in a subdivision. You might not attend any of the meetings or care that you're in one, but your property value still increases by being a part of it. But I agree, the real issue is finding the line and not crossing it.

There are plenty of schools that have good academics and some level of athletics, but there are plenty of schools that go DIII and those are some of the really great schools (MIT comes to mind). I enjoyed some athletic events in my college years, though I have more time now as an alum actually. I appreciate the enjoyment my oldest daughter has with App football (and she is into in big time) and baseball to a lesser extent. However I would be just as happy if those loans she has, and I have, were a few thousand dollars less and that with the interest charged are only growing if it meant sports were non-scholly and/or just intramurals. Sports is really not that big of a benefit or even any benefit. I enjoy my Mountaineer sports but I am not sure I would call it a benefit that really makes the college experience.

You're right, there are several schools that have made a name for themselves academically that don't need D1 sports to help their brand awareness. For the Georgia Southern's and App State's, we know we have good academics and research going on that deserves attention, but we aren't flagships, so nobody is going to know about us unless we exist on a national stage. It's proven to show that academics benefit from a strong athletic presence in schools that would otherwise not have it. Strong athletics lead to brand recognition which leads to better quality incoming students and higher donation levels which then leads to better research capabilities and higher academic prestige. That's why our schools are paying to play in the FBS.

To each their own as far as thinking athletics isn't important to the college experience or provides any benefit, but I actually decided on Georgia Southern because I wanted the college experience. I was choosing between GS and Southern Polytech (a smaller but respected engineering school in Atlanta). Both schools' engineering programs had similar reputations so my decision ultimately came down to the fact that I wanted to be in the marching band and I wanted to go to FB games and get a real college experience. Southern Poly doesn't exist anymore. It has since been absorbed by a larger school with D1 sports even though Southern Poly had a better academic reputation.

Like I said, to each their own, but athletics play an important role to a university. If they didn't, we would see more schools who drop sports or move down divisions to save money, but we are actually seeing the opposite. If Georgia Southern didn't restart football in the 80's, we wouldn't be half the size we are now or have half the academic capabilities. We'd probably be similar to Ga Southwestern and if you don't know what Ga Southwestern is, that's exactly my point.
02-28-2018 11:29 AM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
Post Reply 




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


Copyright © 2002-2024 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.
We allow third-party companies to serve ads and/or collect certain anonymous information when you visit our web site. These companies may use non-personally identifiable information (e.g., click stream information, browser type, time and date, subject of advertisements clicked or scrolled over) during your visits to this and other Web sites in order to provide advertisements about goods and services likely to be of greater interest to you. These companies typically use a cookie or third party web beacon to collect this information. To learn more about this behavioral advertising practice or to opt-out of this type of advertising, you can visit http://www.networkadvertising.org.
Powered By MyBB, © 2002-2024 MyBB Group.