(03-28-2020 05:02 PM)DFW HOYA Wrote:  

(03-27-2020 04:11 PM)TDenverFan Wrote:  Have they? A quick google search shows their acceptance rate is 39%, seems like they could increase enrollment easy enough

Tulsa accepts 39% but only 21% of the 39% actually go there. Admissions yield (those who actually go there) is the unseen number on college admissions.

Harvard's yield is 82%, the nation's best. If you're admitted to Harvard, chances are you're going there unless Stanford or maybe Yale is calling.

By contrast, the yield at St. John's is 11%, meaning that for every 10 kids accepted there, one shows up.

I've never thought about admissions yield, but that's a good point.

One problem is that most of the colleges and universities that are private are not going after non-traditional students who are not between the age of 18 to 22. If they opened up to older people to get degrees? The enrollment could go up at these schools. These small privates including Tulsa, need to change the models to get older non-traditional students.

(03-28-2020 04:06 PM)teamvsn Wrote:  Quo Vadis is in deep denial or too proud to admit he's wrong. Just let it go everybody....

Translation: teamsvn continues to have zero proof for his bizarro assertions, but is clinging to them anyway.

San Francisco Art To Close Down

This could be an example.

(03-28-2020 12:09 PM)quo vadis Wrote:  I don't think anyone is just randomly spending $30,000 for a year of college. They spend that amount for a reason, as there are always cheaper alternatives. And while we can go in circles around this, I'm not going to accept, without proof, that anyone is dumb enough to pay $30,000 a year for the purpose of being the 70th guy on a D2 or lower roster. That just beggars belief to me.

It seems unlikely that the guy who is 70th guy on a D2 or lower roster as a freshman expects to finish his college career as the 70th guy on the roster.

But that's also the extreme case. If most of the guys who are 70th on the roster are "true walk-ons" and the recruited players are mostly first and second string, the number of football players means if only half of the team had the ability to play football figure into their final choice of schools and the rest made a list of schools where they could hope to walk on and then made their final school decision for other reasons, that's still a tuition revenue benefit at a school that is not admitting the maximum size class they have the capacity to admit.

(03-29-2020 06:49 AM)BruceMcF Wrote:  

(03-28-2020 12:09 PM)quo vadis Wrote:  I don't think anyone is just randomly spending $30,000 for a year of college. They spend that amount for a reason, as there are always cheaper alternatives. And while we can go in circles around this, I'm not going to accept, without proof, that anyone is dumb enough to pay $30,000 a year for the purpose of being the 70th guy on a D2 or lower roster. That just beggars belief to me.

It seems unlikely that the guy who is 70th guy on a D2 or lower roster as a freshman expects to finish his college career as the 70th guy on the roster.

But that's also the extreme case. If most of the guys who are 70th on the roster are "true walk-ons" and the recruited players are mostly first and second string, the number of football players means if only half of the team had the ability to play football figure into their final choice of schools and the rest made a list of schools where they could hope to walk on and then made their final school decision for other reasons, that's still a tuition revenue benefit at a school that is not admitting the maximum size class they have the capacity to admit.

Extreme case? I've been told these D2 schools often have 110-man rosters, so I picked "70" as kind of a mid-point between the 35 or so guys who are starters or close to it and thus getting scholarships and the 110th guy who is milking cows.

Nor do I think that anyone is going to pay $30k a year to start their 'career' as the 70th guy on the roster, and spend that amount over 3 more years in the hopes that after two or three years on the pine and $90k spent, they will finally break in to the starting lineup at North Stovepipe Dixie Tech as a junior or senior.

(03-29-2020 12:42 AM)DavidSt Wrote:  San Francisco Art To Close Down

This could be an example.

San Francisco Art Institute IS NOT the D2/PacWest Academy of Art Urban Knights. I never heard of SFAI but I do know they do not have athletics.

(03-29-2020 09:38 AM)quo vadis Wrote:  

(03-29-2020 06:49 AM)BruceMcF Wrote:  

(03-28-2020 12:09 PM)quo vadis Wrote:  I don't think anyone is just randomly spending $30,000 for a year of college. They spend that amount for a reason, as there are always cheaper alternatives. And while we can go in circles around this, I'm not going to accept, without proof, that anyone is dumb enough to pay $30,000 a year for the purpose of being the 70th guy on a D2 or lower roster. That just beggars belief to me.

It seems unlikely that the guy who is 70th guy on a D2 or lower roster as a freshman expects to finish his college career as the 70th guy on the roster.

But that's also the extreme case. If most of the guys who are 70th on the roster are "true walk-ons" and the recruited players are mostly first and second string, the number of football players means if only half of the team had the ability to play football figure into their final choice of schools and the rest made a list of schools where they could hope to walk on and then made their final school decision for other reasons, that's still a tuition revenue benefit at a school that is not admitting the maximum size class they have the capacity to admit.

Extreme case? I've been told these D2 schools often have 110-man rosters, so I picked "70" as kind of a mid-point between the 35 or so guys who are starters or close to it and thus getting scholarships and the 110th guy who is milking cows.

Nor do I think that anyone is going to pay $30k a year to start their 'career' as the 70th guy on the roster, and spend that amount over 3 more years in the hopes that after two or three years on the pine and $90k spent, they will finally break in to the starting lineup at North Stovepipe Dixie Tech as a junior or senior.

If they're planning on going to college, that $30,000 is being spent no matter what, if they want to continue playing football, they'll pick a school with D2 or D3 football.

It's not like the decision for these kids is a a D2 school with football vs getting a job right out of high school.

Someone can believe whatever they want to believe but the reality is that it is in fact happening.


That's 53,348 players on 504 teams paying some or all of their college expenses knowing this will most likely be the end of the football road for them. Some might never see any playing time but they all still do for any of a variety of reasons. I did it and others on this board either did it or know someone who did it.

More than 1M kids play high school football but less than 0.2% will ever make a NFL roster; maybe go and ask them why they play.

AZCats,

Can you also put in D-I?

It should be note almost all D-II and even many FCS scholarships are not full scholarships.

As Stugray2 noted; D2 and NAIA scholarships are equivalencies, meaning 72 D2 players or 48 NAIA players per team can have 1/2 scholarship. It should also be noted that very few D2 and NAIA schools offer the maximum, some have less than 10 scholarships. FBS is headcount while FCS is equivalency with a maximum of 85 headcount (41 full-ride + 44 half-ride).

It looks like that even at the FBS level there are about 30 players per team paying $30,000 a year to walk-on and hope they can get any playing time or a scholarship. Just look at Rudy and Notre Dame.

(03-29-2020 10:03 AM)AZcats Wrote:  

(03-29-2020 12:42 AM)DavidSt Wrote:  San Francisco Art To Close Down

This could be an example.

San Francisco Art Institute IS NOT the D2/PacWest Academy of Art Urban Knights. I never heard of SFAI but I do know they do not have athletics.

Did I say anything about athletics? I used them as an example what could happen with these small schools with athletics.

(03-29-2020 12:54 PM)DavidSt Wrote:  

(03-29-2020 10:03 AM)AZcats Wrote:  

(03-29-2020 12:42 AM)DavidSt Wrote:  San Francisco Art To Close Down

This could be an example.

San Francisco Art Institute IS NOT the D2/PacWest Academy of Art Urban Knights. I never heard of SFAI but I do know they do not have athletics.

Did I say anything about athletics? I used them as an example what could happen with these small schools with athletics.

1) I was only stating that these were two distinct, separate, and unrelated schools.

2) So; you're comparing a private school that offers degrees only in Art, Film, Printmaking, Photography, Painting, and Sculpture to 400 undergrad students with no athletics to schools who offer degrees in a variety of fields with athletics. You can't compare an apple to an orange.

(03-29-2020 11:26 AM)Minutemen429 Wrote:  

(03-29-2020 09:38 AM)quo vadis Wrote:  

(03-29-2020 06:49 AM)BruceMcF Wrote:  

(03-28-2020 12:09 PM)quo vadis Wrote:  I don't think anyone is just randomly spending $30,000 for a year of college. They spend that amount for a reason, as there are always cheaper alternatives. And while we can go in circles around this, I'm not going to accept, without proof, that anyone is dumb enough to pay $30,000 a year for the purpose of being the 70th guy on a D2 or lower roster. That just beggars belief to me.

It seems unlikely that the guy who is 70th guy on a D2 or lower roster as a freshman expects to finish his college career as the 70th guy on the roster.

But that's also the extreme case. If most of the guys who are 70th on the roster are "true walk-ons" and the recruited players are mostly first and second string, the number of football players means if only half of the team had the ability to play football figure into their final choice of schools and the rest made a list of schools where they could hope to walk on and then made their final school decision for other reasons, that's still a tuition revenue benefit at a school that is not admitting the maximum size class they have the capacity to admit.

Extreme case? I've been told these D2 schools often have 110-man rosters, so I picked "70" as kind of a mid-point between the 35 or so guys who are starters or close to it and thus getting scholarships and the 110th guy who is milking cows.

Nor do I think that anyone is going to pay $30k a year to start their 'career' as the 70th guy on the roster, and spend that amount over 3 more years in the hopes that after two or three years on the pine and $90k spent, they will finally break in to the starting lineup at North Stovepipe Dixie Tech as a junior or senior.

If they're planning on going to college, that $30,000 is being spent no matter what, if they want to continue playing football, they'll pick a school with D2 or D3 football.

It's not like the decision for these kids is a a D2 school with football vs getting a job right out of high school.

That's the second time I've seen that posted here, and it is baffling, as it is just not true. There are plenty of places a kid can go to college for way, way, way less than $30,000 a year.

(03-29-2020 11:29 AM)AZcats Wrote:  Someone can believe whatever they want to believe but the reality is that it is in fact happening.

Be careful about what you claim is "in fact happening". Are kids going to D2 and D3 and NAIA schools and paying tuition and room and board and playing football? Yes.

But that's not the issue, the issue is "are they going to those schools to play football", IOW's, if the schools didn't have football, they wouldn't have gone to that school and the school would have lost their attendance money.

And your charts do not show that anyone is doing that. They might be or might not be, but the charts don't tell us either way.

(03-29-2020 01:41 PM)quo vadis Wrote:  

(03-29-2020 11:26 AM)Minutemen429 Wrote:  

(03-29-2020 09:38 AM)quo vadis Wrote:  

(03-29-2020 06:49 AM)BruceMcF Wrote:  

(03-28-2020 12:09 PM)quo vadis Wrote:  I don't think anyone is just randomly spending $30,000 for a year of college. They spend that amount for a reason, as there are always cheaper alternatives. And while we can go in circles around this, I'm not going to accept, without proof, that anyone is dumb enough to pay $30,000 a year for the purpose of being the 70th guy on a D2 or lower roster. That just beggars belief to me.

It seems unlikely that the guy who is 70th guy on a D2 or lower roster as a freshman expects to finish his college career as the 70th guy on the roster.

But that's also the extreme case. If most of the guys who are 70th on the roster are "true walk-ons" and the recruited players are mostly first and second string, the number of football players means if only half of the team had the ability to play football figure into their final choice of schools and the rest made a list of schools where they could hope to walk on and then made their final school decision for other reasons, that's still a tuition revenue benefit at a school that is not admitting the maximum size class they have the capacity to admit.

Extreme case? I've been told these D2 schools often have 110-man rosters, so I picked "70" as kind of a mid-point between the 35 or so guys who are starters or close to it and thus getting scholarships and the 110th guy who is milking cows.

Nor do I think that anyone is going to pay $30k a year to start their 'career' as the 70th guy on the roster, and spend that amount over 3 more years in the hopes that after two or three years on the pine and $90k spent, they will finally break in to the starting lineup at North Stovepipe Dixie Tech as a junior or senior.

If they're planning on going to college, that $30,000 is being spent no matter what, if they want to continue playing football, they'll pick a school with D2 or D3 football.

It's not like the decision for these kids is a a D2 school with football vs getting a job right out of high school.

That's the second time I've seen that posted here, and it is baffling, as it is just not true. There are plenty of places a kid can go to college for way, way, way less than $30,000 a year.

There are places you can play D2 or D3 football for way way less than $30,000 a year.

On the other hand there are plenty of non-football players going to 30,000 plus a year schools that would be better served going to a much cheaper school given their major and aptitude.

(03-29-2020 01:41 PM)quo vadis Wrote:  

(03-29-2020 11:26 AM)Minutemen429 Wrote:  

(03-29-2020 09:38 AM)quo vadis Wrote:  

(03-29-2020 06:49 AM)BruceMcF Wrote:  

(03-28-2020 12:09 PM)quo vadis Wrote:  I don't think anyone is just randomly spending $30,000 for a year of college. They spend that amount for a reason, as there are always cheaper alternatives. And while we can go in circles around this, I'm not going to accept, without proof, that anyone is dumb enough to pay $30,000 a year for the purpose of being the 70th guy on a D2 or lower roster. That just beggars belief to me.

It seems unlikely that the guy who is 70th guy on a D2 or lower roster as a freshman expects to finish his college career as the 70th guy on the roster.

But that's also the extreme case. If most of the guys who are 70th on the roster are "true walk-ons" and the recruited players are mostly first and second string, the number of football players means if only half of the team had the ability to play football figure into their final choice of schools and the rest made a list of schools where they could hope to walk on and then made their final school decision for other reasons, that's still a tuition revenue benefit at a school that is not admitting the maximum size class they have the capacity to admit.

Extreme case? I've been told these D2 schools often have 110-man rosters, so I picked "70" as kind of a mid-point between the 35 or so guys who are starters or close to it and thus getting scholarships and the 110th guy who is milking cows.

Nor do I think that anyone is going to pay $30k a year to start their 'career' as the 70th guy on the roster, and spend that amount over 3 more years in the hopes that after two or three years on the pine and $90k spent, they will finally break in to the starting lineup at North Stovepipe Dixie Tech as a junior or senior.

If they're planning on going to college, that $30,000 is being spent no matter what, if they want to continue playing football, they'll pick a school with D2 or D3 football.

It's not like the decision for these kids is a a D2 school with football vs getting a job right out of high school.

That's the second time I've seen that posted here, and it is baffling, as it is just not true. There are plenty of places a kid can go to college for way, way, way less than $30,000 a year.

OK, Guidance Counselor Quo, where is Joseph Gribble from the Dallas suburbs, family income around $100,000 a year, 2.0 GPA, 980 SAT, going to school for much less than $30,000 a year tuition, within 500 miles of home? Forget football for now.

That kid's options are Arlen Community College, or pay the bill.

(03-29-2020 06:14 PM)johnbragg Wrote:  

(03-29-2020 01:41 PM)quo vadis Wrote:  

(03-29-2020 11:26 AM)Minutemen429 Wrote:  

(03-29-2020 09:38 AM)quo vadis Wrote:  

(03-29-2020 06:49 AM)BruceMcF Wrote:  It seems unlikely that the guy who is 70th guy on a D2 or lower roster as a freshman expects to finish his college career as the 70th guy on the roster.

But that's also the extreme case. If most of the guys who are 70th on the roster are "true walk-ons" and the recruited players are mostly first and second string, the number of football players means if only half of the team had the ability to play football figure into their final choice of schools and the rest made a list of schools where they could hope to walk on and then made their final school decision for other reasons, that's still a tuition revenue benefit at a school that is not admitting the maximum size class they have the capacity to admit.

Extreme case? I've been told these D2 schools often have 110-man rosters, so I picked "70" as kind of a mid-point between the 35 or so guys who are starters or close to it and thus getting scholarships and the 110th guy who is milking cows.

Nor do I think that anyone is going to pay $30k a year to start their 'career' as the 70th guy on the roster, and spend that amount over 3 more years in the hopes that after two or three years on the pine and $90k spent, they will finally break in to the starting lineup at North Stovepipe Dixie Tech as a junior or senior.

If they're planning on going to college, that $30,000 is being spent no matter what, if they want to continue playing football, they'll pick a school with D2 or D3 football.

It's not like the decision for these kids is a a D2 school with football vs getting a job right out of high school.

That's the second time I've seen that posted here, and it is baffling, as it is just not true. There are plenty of places a kid can go to college for way, way, way less than $30,000 a year.

OK, Guidance Counselor Quo, where is Joseph Gribble from the Dallas suburbs, family income around $100,000 a year, 2.0 GPA, 980 SAT, going to school for much less than $30,000 a year tuition, within 500 miles of home? Forget football for now.

That kid's options are Arlen Community College, or pay the bill.

I'm sure there are many schools within 500 miles of DFW that don't charge $30k a year in tuition. Texas is loaded with public schools.

And if the kid's options really are CC or $30k, and he's dead-set on attending a "real college" not CC, then he's going to pay the $30k football or not.

(03-30-2020 09:41 AM)quo vadis Wrote:  

(03-29-2020 06:14 PM)johnbragg Wrote:  

(03-29-2020 01:41 PM)quo vadis Wrote:  

(03-29-2020 11:26 AM)Minutemen429 Wrote:  

(03-29-2020 09:38 AM)quo vadis Wrote:  Extreme case? I've been told these D2 schools often have 110-man rosters, so I picked "70" as kind of a mid-point between the 35 or so guys who are starters or close to it and thus getting scholarships and the 110th guy who is milking cows.

Nor do I think that anyone is going to pay $30k a year to start their 'career' as the 70th guy on the roster, and spend that amount over 3 more years in the hopes that after two or three years on the pine and $90k spent, they will finally break in to the starting lineup at North Stovepipe Dixie Tech as a junior or senior.

If they're planning on going to college, that $30,000 is being spent no matter what, if they want to continue playing football, they'll pick a school with D2 or D3 football.

It's not like the decision for these kids is a a D2 school with football vs getting a job right out of high school.

That's the second time I've seen that posted here, and it is baffling, as it is just not true. There are plenty of places a kid can go to college for way, way, way less than $30,000 a year.

OK, Guidance Counselor Quo, where is Joseph Gribble from the Dallas suburbs, family income around $100,000 a year, 2.0 GPA, 980 SAT, going to school for much less than $30,000 a year tuition, within 500 miles of home? Forget football for now.

That kid's options are Arlen Community College, or pay the bill.

I'm sure there are many schools within 500 miles of DFW that don't charge $30k a year in tuition. Texas is loaded with public schools.

I'm asking for one school, where a kid with ath-a-lete grades and SAT scores (good enough to play, which is all he really cares about) is in the 25%+ percentile of admissions. I assigned Joseph Gribble a 980 SAT and a 2.0 GPA.

Quote:And if the kid's options really are CC or $30k, and he's dead-set on attending a "real college" not CC, then he's going to pay the $30k football or not.

Yes, he's going to pay the $30K football or not, which is what we've been yelling at you for a week or so.

At that point, he's going to choose pay $30K and play football (or at least be on the team) for Northwest Texas Methobaptist University over paying $15K and watching FCS football at Central Arkansas.

Ope, his 2.0 GPA isn't good enough to get into Central Arkansas. https://uca.edu/ubulletin/general-polici...niversity/

(03-27-2020 04:53 PM)Erictelevision Wrote:  My D-III alma mater was completely a commuter school until recently. I assume not having dorms saves $$$

Dorms are a profit center. Colleges offer discounted tuition but make a killing on the dorms.

The enrollment impacts I predict:

1. International students. How long will it be before international travel returns? International students won't return at a lot of places.

2. College towns. Just the thought of being stuck in the middle of nowhere on top of thousands of students will make many cringe.

3. Universities without Health Sciences. There is going to be a shortage in medical professionals and those with health science/medical schools can weather the storm.

There is going to be states where you might see a flip in enrollment demand from college towns to urban campuses where staying in the dorms isn't required.

Some of the G5's may weather this better than P5's who have propped their admissions up with international and out-of-state students.

Illinois is an example to consider. We know its a high population state that has been exporting HS students across the Midwest. Less international students means more spots available at U of I. That means less Chicago kids going to places like Indiana and Ohio State. Those schools will do what Big Ten schools have always done in times of crisis; lower standards.

For the MAC schools I bet the response will be to go smaller and keep the 3.5 class averages most of them now have intact. It will mean layoffs but I don't see away around it with so many factors against enrollments returning.

Miami University is going to get hard hit as its appeal is driven around the college town experience (out), international demand (out), out of state demand (out), business college (out). Go smaller or lower your standards. I would think they would prefer to go smaller, maybe reduce by 5,000 or more.