Well, technically the COA is dictated solely by financial aid depts through federal guidelines with approval through the provost/president, so, not controlled by the athletics dept, but we know how that could evolve. The check and balance will be that right now schools are in the $1000-$6000 range, but if it started escalating, they will run the risk of being perceived/classified as employers of the athletes they are serving and lose their 501©e exemption status. The difference right now even between $150/mo vs $700/mo would be enough to impact the decision of a recruit who has a lower economic background. Certainly, the whole COA scenario was a veiled attempt by the NCAA P5 schools to ward off law suits over their profits from escalating revenues.

JMU coaches have been outspoken about the COA. They are saying recruits are asking about the COA on a regular basis.

I think W&M/the CAA will be paying the COA in the near future. Delaware is probably next to announce a plan.

This whole topic makes me sad and tired.

Sad, because it is one more step towards the professionalization of college sports. It's fine for those large 64-80 schools that can afford to field semi-pro teams and don't mind sullying their reputations in doing so. (I understand the University of Miami is actually a good school but ...). I had hoped W&M could avoid going down that path.

Sad, because I think Taylor Reveley actually has a strong ethical opposition to COA and I suspect we will be late adaptors to the idea, perhaps along with Drexel.

Tired, because I know Tribe basketball fans are going to have to remove another boulder to the basketball success we all hope for.

I'm ready to make that push just like we did with the summer scholarship situation but it just seems a shame.

Bourne was on the radio yesterday in HBurg. He said he expects 8 out of 10 CAA schools, and possibly more, to offer COA soon.

(06-21-2016 11:05 AM)JMU2004 Wrote:  Bourne was on the radio yesterday in HBurg. He said he expects 8 out of 10 CAA schools, and possibly more, to offer COA soon.

Did he have any guesses as to which ones wouldn't?

I would guess Drexel and maybe Northeastern?

I would guess Drexel and W&M.

I will reserve judgement until I hear definite word, but until then, I'll let the little fellows speak for me, if W&M is one of the two exceptions.

We're in a better posistion financially than a lot of other CAA schools, I doubt it's us.

I wouldn't put too much stock in anything Bourne says. Let's just monitor the situation.

(06-21-2016 12:55 PM)TDenverFan Wrote:  

(06-21-2016 11:05 AM)JMU2004 Wrote:  Bourne was on the radio yesterday in HBurg. He said he expects 8 out of 10 CAA schools, and possibly more, to offer COA soon.

Did he have any guesses as to which ones wouldn't?

I would guess Drexel and maybe Northeastern?

-------------------------------------------------------------------------
Why would you think Drexel and Northeastern would be holdouts for paying/not paying the COA?

Northeastern has plenty of money - I recently read that they pay their President more than 2 Million $$ per year.

I'm not known for being an upbeat optimist but my thinking that W&M might not go COA is driven by the stand Reveley took in 2014:

http://www.dailypress.com/sports/fairban...-post.html

He didn't leave a lot of wiggle room there.

I don't think the COA gets to the decision-makers in the Athletic Department until it gets past the academic/institutional gatekeepers. One of the drawbacks of supporting the sports programs at a strong academic institution is that the academic side controls the decisions.

One of the reasons for our NCAA drought is that we try to do things the right way. I still bitterly remember the Delaware suspensions a couple of years ago that miraculously ended right before the CAA tournament. We won't do that and I'm afraid we won't do COA either.

But then maybe I'm all wet on this.

We are inherently recruiting a narrower pool of athletes by the nature of the school. Yes, COA may put us at a disadvantage for recruits from less advantaged families, but it may not be that significant a factor for the remainder of the recruits in our pool. Have to support Reveley's principle regarding college missions. Those quotes were, also, made prior to the Campaign for the Bold, and the recent announced tuition hikes (in deference to the General Assembly), so, the financial view now may be in a little different place from where it was two years ago.
Would, also, believe that our Pres is conscious of not making any major decisions in his last leg before retirement without consensus from those who will be carrying on when he has stepped down. Either way, I believe in the wisdom of the current leadership and where they have positioned us going forward, and will support wherever that continuing decision making falls on this matter. In the end, it is all about perspective, including where our future league affiliation may be. Not convinced yet that the rest of the CAA automatically follows suit.

While I agree with most of the points being made, I believe that CoA goes beyond disadvantaged families. IMO, an academically inclined athlete looking at 2 schools with comparable academics & similar levels of ball, would pick the one offering the most CoA help. Whether you come from a financially affluent family or not, 17 year old kids are broke. Even if you're not broke, you want more. These coaches know who their competition is for recruits. Do you think that they won't have these other school's CoA numbers to throw out on the table? If I, as a coach, can show you that my school can provide every advantage that W&M can, plus an extra $4,000 in your pocket - it's a no brainer.

You think college basketball has a transfer epidemic? Just wait until these $$ amounts are sorted and common. You have a ton of mid major kids thinking about transferring now. Friends and family are in their ears. College coaches are in their ears. Add a $5k raise and it's even tougher not to change "jobs".

Put yourself in the shoes of a 17 year old high school player that likely had no job, no income, and no substantial savings. They like to eat out a lot. They like new $200 shoes. They want expensive electronics.

Perhaps I'm wrong and money isn't a driving force in these decisions. Unfortunately, I believe the odds are in my favor.

You are spot on. Anyone who thinks that it won't make a difference is nuts. To add to the equation.....most scholarship kids pick a college to attend based on two major things: 1) the coach and 2) promise of playing time. Now you throw money into the equation. It will definitely lean to the places that pay better. Kids aren't stupid. The ones who enter college knowing that they aren't going to play professionally will look at the money as a true stipend for playing and giving up their free time.

(06-22-2016 04:20 AM)mrjoolius Wrote:  While I agree with most of the points being made, I believe that CoA goes beyond disadvantaged families. IMO, an academically inclined athlete looking at 2 schools with comparable academics & similar levels of ball, would pick the one offering the most CoA help. Whether you come from a financially affluent family or not, 17 year old kids are broke. Even if you're not broke, you want more. These coaches know who their competition is for recruits. Do you think that they won't have these other school's CoA numbers to throw out on the table? If I, as a coach, can show you that my school can provide every advantage that W&M can, plus an extra $4,000 in your pocket - it's a no brainer.

You think college basketball has a transfer epidemic? Just wait until these $$ amounts are sorted and common. You have a ton of mid major kids thinking about transferring now. Friends and family are in their ears. College coaches are in their ears. Add a $5k raise and it's even tougher not to change "jobs".

Put yourself in the shoes of a 17 year old high school player that likely had no job, no income, and no substantial savings. They like to eat out a lot. They like new $200 shoes. They want expensive electronics.

Perhaps I'm wrong and money isn't a driving force in these decisions. Unfortunately, I believe the odds are in my favor.

Sadly, I believe Tribe32 and Mr Joolius are correct. Money like the COA will make a difference in college selection. It is a step that takes college sports on the road to true professionalism (although in some universities that day came years ago!).

I honestly don't know, or have heard from anyone who does have an idea, what W&M will do. There are some folks in the W&M Alumni family who have the money would fund it for basketball.

I still don't understand how universities can offer the COA to one or two sports but not have to do this for every sport. Perhaps we'll see a legal challenge that might stop the whole rotton thing.

I know the ship has sailed, but I am proud of W&M being highly competitive academically and being able to compete athletically as well. W&M is one of a few schools left where the ideal of student athletes competing as amateurs athletically while preparing for life in a university setting is still alive and well.

I hope that we are neither to early nor too late making this unfortunate adjustment. It is an unfortunate development driven by those a the top to widen their lead. It is a shame that the NCAA does not have the ability to focus on defeating issues such as this, but rather wastes its time being a pc cop on small schools mascots and nick names.