(04-08-2018 04:57 PM)Attackcoog Wrote:  

(04-08-2018 04:13 PM)quo vadis Wrote:  

(04-08-2018 03:00 PM)Attackcoog Wrote:  

(04-08-2018 02:52 PM)quo vadis Wrote:  

(04-08-2018 11:37 AM)Ohio Poly Wrote:  No one is forced to attend UC or any AAC school. So the fees are optional for all AAC students and they are opting in at a rate of 100%.

That is a strange way to look at it, because the student should not have his or her valid educational program options held hostage to a dumb athletic fee.

There are very few if any services that are not held "hostage" to some fee or built-in cost that the buyer may or may not prefer be there. If you consider sales taxes, virtually every transaction by definition is subsizing other programs that the buyer may not ever use or even support.

College is not different from the primary public education systems across the nation. Millions of dollars are spent on athletics in every school district---even though most middle and high schools students will never play a single sport. Those that have interests in the sciences still subsidize band, cheerleading, wresting, choir, and theatre, ect. Nothing new here.

Huh? High school kids don't pay a fee to fund the football or basketball teams. That funding comes from the school district. So the athletic fees at college are totally different.

Second, in high school, the regular students aren't paying fees to fund "scholarships" for the athletes. They aren't being asked to pay for their own tuition, PLUS pay a fee on top to help defray the cost of an athlete's tuition. Think about how dumb and unfair that is.

If college students are paying a fee to fund intramural athletics on campus, that is appropriate, as it provides a recreational benefit every student can participate in if they want to. Of course, those fees are nothing compared to the fees charged to fund the school's intercollegiate sports teams.

What do you mean. huh? High school students dont pay a fee period. They do pay taxes that support both the academic and athletic parts of the school district. Furthermore, those that attend private schools pay for the athletic programs as part of their tuition (as well as taxes to support a public school district they dont attend at all---talk about unfair). Bottom line---The cost of maintaining and running a modern primary public school district includes a cost for athletics. That money is not going to academics---which I assume is your argument at the university level. As far as college goes---If mandatory, the athletic fees are simply part of the cost of attendance---no different than building use fees.

My point is---we accept athletic spending that is not self supporting at the local school district level. Not sure why there should be an expectation that programs that are not self sustaining at the HS level will be at the college level. By and large--they are not. Only 20-30 college athletic programs actually make money or break even. Most lose money---just as they do at the HS level.

As for scholarships---how much does it really cost to add one more kid to a class? And by the way, if we are going to get rid of athletics scholarships because its not right to make other kids pay for them---then its not right to make them pay for academic scholarships either.

In the end--it comes down to choice. Do you wish to attend a school with an athletics department or not? That choice is made by the buyer of academic services. If you wish to go to a school with an athletics department your going to have to pay for that amenity. If you wish to go to that school, but dont want to fund its athletics department---well--thats a decision you have to make. However, I cant sympathize with any really whining about it. There are plenty of places to get a degree that do not offer athletics. In fact, since FBS athletic departments appear to the worst offenders in the area of athletic fees---avoiding just 130 schools out of a universe of literally 1000's of higher education options will essentially eliminate the issue for the buyer who wants to avoid high athletic fees.

The reality is----if this issue is a priority with the student---the decision to attend a school with low or no athletic fee is completely and totally within their control.

“Avoiding 130 schools”....to avoid athletic fees.
It’s a lot less than that. Most of those 130 don’t charge athletic fees. Most aren’t UMASS, UCONN etc. Many have 0 athletic fees and some have 0 subsidies.