(01-07-2020 12:18 PM)BearcatMan Wrote:  To reiterate, I said the idea of EXPANDING the AD is ridiculous...now if you're talking about severe contraction and putting wrestling in then I'd be on board.

Also, shifting that tuition number to only show the surplus aid needed after merit awards and federal aid are added in would only cut roughly 35% of the $9M expense off...so you're still staring down a nice round $18M deficit every year.

No that's not what I am saying. Financial aid is just a way of financing tuition, it does not add any costs. There are minimal incremental costs to the university for a scholarship when you are only taking up additional seats for a class that is already on the curriculum. You don't add professors, don't add new classrooms or expand existing classroom sizes, don't buy additional desks, etc. etc. There is a big difference between costs and financial aid. The financial aid is funding the charges made by the university for the "market value" of a scholarship - they are not incremental costs.

I don't know if that addresses your post, because I don't know if I fully understand the reference to merit awards and federal aid to answer the point I was making about incremental costs to the university.

Probably not the best way to have a discussion on this topic using a bulletin board, but one of the problems with any government agency is that when you prop up income by charging out monies to other University departments is that it gives the false impression of increasing revenues and justifying increased spending in areas that are not necessary. The General Budget (or whatever it is called at UT) appears to be doing well while the Athletic Department takes the hits for the 85 scholarships (as an example) in football that are awarded. In reality, the incremental costs for tuition on those 85 scholarships out of a student base already being served of around 20,000 is going to be negligible. It's different for the costs of room and board. Most of those costs are real incremental costs incurred that will increase nearly linear to the number of scholarships filled (ie books, food, some portion of the dorm rooms, etc.)

To me, I make the decision on a cash on cash basis. What are the cash costs of additional scholarships, the costs for administering the sport (coaches, travel, equipment, etc.) and how much is offset from revenues from tickets, donations, fund raisers, etc.

And yes, my proposal would be to get rid of something in return for adding something. I understood your point about not expanding further - and I agree with that, unless there was a "white knight booster" that was willing to fund much of the additional costs. Say Wojo won the lottery and wanted to get wrestling back at UT...

(01-07-2020 01:43 PM)UTerry Wrote:  

(01-07-2020 09:17 AM)BearcatMan Wrote:  

(01-07-2020 08:40 AM)UTerry Wrote:  One aspect of the athletic budget is the cost of scholarships.
The athletic department actually pays/transfers money to the finance/bursars office for the tuition of all athletes on scholarship in all sports.
Understandable.....
But I found out some years ago is that if an athlete is from out of state (or out of the country), the athletic department must also pay out of state of Ohio tuition for each one of those athletes.
Is this a UT only practice or done by all universities????
(note: seems like shuffling the shell game to me....)
How much would that cut off the athletic budget if all athletic scholarships were "classified" (not knowing a better word) as in state???

Nope, that's required by the NCAA. Any Full-pay scholarship limits must be paid as such (any that are partial awards can still collect other additional aid and are not allocated as full awards for the AD's budget purposes).

So to clarify your answer, no it's not a Toledo only shell game. The shell game is required by the NCAA. Correct???

I would say that is correct, but I don't really know what the NCAA requires - or why. I'm just going off what was posted - and I believe Bearcat knows that with certainty. I can understand why they want to handle that way, but it is not something I would use to make decisions from. Allocations and charge-outs are the "shell game" you are referring to - and those usually end up resulting in the absence of accountability for increased spending. Then the answer is to go out and try to raise more money to cover the ever expanding costs of a University that has expanded it's footprint over the years, but has seen very little increase in the number of students.

Ever take a look at the number of administrators in all of the departments? It's mind blowing.

The discussion of scholarships got me thinking. I wonder if athletes on scholarship can apply for additional grants and scholarships to offset the cost to the athletic department. If so, it might be worthwhile to hire someone whose sole job is to search them out and assist the athletes in the application process.

(01-11-2020 10:58 AM)RocketJeff Wrote:  The discussion of scholarships got me thinking. I wonder if athletes on scholarship can apply for additional grants and scholarships to offset the cost to the athletic department. If so, it might be worthwhile to hire someone whose sole job is to search them out and assist the athletes in the application process.

Drew Brees did exactly that if I understand correctly. He set up scholarship foundation for non-revenue sport athletes.

Interesting connection in that like Ealey, Brees also is not eligible for College HOF. He was the Maxwell winner, even the Academic AA POY but not on the AA teams eligibile for enshrinement. Only those who played 50 years ago or longer can by-pass that rule, the CHOF has been consistent in the rules application.

The major difference though is Purdue has someone hounding CHOF to try and get rules amended. His pressure point in this clause in the rules:

Quote:"While each nominee’s football achievements in college are of prime consideration, his post football record as a citizen is also weighed. He must have proven himself worthy as a citizen, carrying the ideals of football forward into his relations with his community and fellow man. Consideration may also be given for academic honors and whether or not the candidate earned a college degree."

"Prime" consideration is not the same as "mandated."

Perhaps there's reason the COF has failed and moved so many times?

(01-11-2020 10:58 AM)RocketJeff Wrote:  The discussion of scholarships got me thinking. I wonder if athletes on scholarship can apply for additional grants and scholarships to offset the cost to the athletic department. If so, it might be worthwhile to hire someone whose sole job is to search them out and assist the athletes in the application process.

I believe I've heard that if student-athletes on athletic scholarship receive other scholarships in additional to their athletic scholarships, they are able to keep the additional scholarship in cash. If that is true, those SAs won't want to give up their scholarships.

(01-11-2020 04:36 PM)MidnightBlueGold Wrote:  

(01-11-2020 10:58 AM)RocketJeff Wrote:  The discussion of scholarships got me thinking. I wonder if athletes on scholarship can apply for additional grants and scholarships to offset the cost to the athletic department. If so, it might be worthwhile to hire someone whose sole job is to search them out and assist the athletes in the application process.

I believe I've heard that if student-athletes on athletic scholarship receive other scholarships in additional to their athletic scholarships, they are able to keep the additional scholarship in cash. If that is true, those SAs won't want to give up their scholarships.

That's how it worked with me, and I dont believe it has changed since. Any general institutional aid is automatically applied first if it is non-refundable, then the athletic scholarship was added on to cover up to COA, then any additional refundable awards (including Pell) were refunded to the student.