Now Legal: Schools Buying Players

[ClamOtto]

Sorry if this was already discussed. I didn't see it anywhere: http://chronicle.com/article/At-Least-15-Athletics-Programs/229229/

SU with the 3rd lowest additional stipend among the P5, about $3,500 less than Louisville. Not good from a competitive standpoint.

 

[OrangeXtreme]

Third-smallest stipend in power-five conferences could hurt Syracuse recruiting (PS: Carlson)

 

[Millhouse]

i'm baffled by all of this

SU BC and USC have the lowest difference between old and new scholarship whatever the hell that means

"The money, part of a new spending allowance approved in January by the five biggest conferences, allows Division I colleges to cover the full cost of players’ scholarships. Previously, colleges could cover only the cost of a basic scholarship — tuition, fees, room and board, and books."

what are those things not covered by a basic scholarship. Travel?

 

[javadoc]

i'm baffled by all of this

SU BC and USC have the lowest difference between old and new scholarship whatever the hell that means

"The money, part of a new spending allowance approved in January by the five biggest conferences, allows Division I colleges to cover the full cost of players’ scholarships. Previously, colleges could cover only the cost of a basic scholarship — tuition, fees, room and board, and books."

what are those things not covered by a basic scholarship. Travel?

This was linked by CarolinaCuse above, and has the basics, if not a fleshed out list of particulars.

https://ifap.ed.gov/sfahandbooks/attachments/0607Vol3Ch2.pdf

I am still mystified by it, as well, even after all the reading. Seems the "miscellaneous" or "slush fund" category is the elastic needed to game the system.

 

[Hoo's That]

You are right - private universities do have some greater limitations.

Your summary is pretty much spot on. Public institutions can increase the CoA because they have to worry less about a family's ability to contribute to the CoA. Public schools are heavily subsidized. Private schools, like Cuse, need to keep the CoA lower to keep the family's estimated contributions lower (needed to determine financial aid).

Think about this - how much of a financial advantage does a school like UGA (or UF, FSU, etc.) have when the vast majority of their recruits are from in-state? While the cost of education for any student is the same, I would imagine that the CoA (behind the scenes) is different for an in-state student vs. an out-of-state student. Right? I have to believe that there are some financial benefits to a public university in a talent-rich state that can keep their best recruits at home. It really makes me wonder how any private school an keep up - even with the separation of the P5s from the NCAA.

Funny you should mention UGA and the HOPE scholarship - I did a research project once on the impact of the HOPE program on brain drain of in-state students before and after the implementation of the HOPE.

SOME state schools are heavily subsidized. Based on real figures and not the fuzzy math the state government tries to use, Virginia pays for only 5-10% of the costs of running UVa. VPI doesn't get much more than that. Some years ago, the then-president of UVa said that, if MEDICAID money paid to their hospitals was included, Wake Forest got more money from North Carolina than UVa got from Virginia. The Texas schools, OTOH, get a lot of state oil money.

UVa has separate figures for in-state and out-of-state students, that only has travel costs as a real difference beyond tuition. The tuition difference only affects the size of the check our fund-raising organization has to pay to the Bursar, not how much money the athletes would get.

The TCOA figure for each school is filed with the Feds under penalty of perjury, so when athletic departments start asking for "adjustments" to it, most presidents' first reaction will be "Danger, Will Robinson!!!!!"

 

[Consigliere]

If I recall correctly, this additional payment must apply to ALL scholarship athletes, not just the revenue producing sports, correct? Not sure what the total number of athletic scholarships offered by Syracuse is, but I'm guessing somewhere between 300 and 400 so the total expense is not insignificant. Another tough challenge for private schools vs. the state tax fed money machines.

 

[Lawrinson14]

If I recall correctly, this additional payment must apply to ALL scholarship athletes, not just the revenue producing sports, correct? Not sure what the total number of athletic scholarships offered by Syracuse is, but I'm guessing somewhere between 300 and 400 so the total expense is not insignificant. Another tough challenge for private schools vs. the state tax fed money machines.

Honest to goodness question...has a university ever switched from private to public? SU as THE flagship NY State institution would be an amazing brand booster. Not to mention, it would get all the financial benefits of being a state school.

 

[orangenirvana]

It's only a matter of time before this blows up in a huge mess. I couldn't believe this was actually going to happen when I first heard about it, if this isn't corrected, the imbalance in recruiting will be enormous. SU might as well become a mid major.

Oh no, Syracuse might go from fourth-worst recruiting class from a power conference to maybe third-worst.

 

[MaxwellCuse]

Could somebody explain why the stipend is only $1,600 when the "indirect costs" -- which are the basis for the stipends -- at SU for 2015/2016 are estimated at $3,044?? I am getting those figures directly from SU's website: https://syr.edu/financialaid/costofattendance/

 

[Hoo's That]

Honest to goodness question...has a university ever switched from private to public? SU as THE flagship NY State institution would be an amazing brand booster. Not to mention, it would get all the financial benefits of being a state school.

Off the top of my head - William & Mary; Marshall

 

[xc84]

Honest to goodness question...has a university ever switched from private to public? SU as THE flagship NY State institution would be an amazing brand booster. Not to mention, it would get all the financial benefits of being a state school.

Yes, many have. SUNYs Buffalo and Bing. were private. Some have elements of both (e.g. Cornell). Pitt was private until the 60s.

 

[Lawrinson14]

Yes, many have. SUNYs Buffalo and Bing. were private. Some have elements of both (e.g. Cornell). Pitt was private until the 60s.

Is this a realistic option for SU? I have no idea what the pros and cons would be other than those I mentioned above.

 

[Cheriehoop]

SU's medical school was jettisoned and they sold it to the state around 60 years ago. It's now Upstate Medical.

 

[Hoo's That]

Is this a realistic option for SU? I have no idea what the pros and cons would be other than those I mentioned above.

I don't think it would matter stipend-wise because tuition, fees, room, board, and books get subtracted from TCOA. Whoever writes the tuition checks would get a break, though.

 

[Hoo's That]

Could somebody explain why the stipend is only $1,600 when the "indirect costs" -- which are the basis for the stipends -- at SU for 2015/2016 are estimated at $3,044?? I am getting those figures directly from SU's website: https://syr.edu/financialaid/costofattendance/

You have to subtract out the $1412 for "books and supplies" from the indirect costs because the grant-in-aid covers them.

 

[MaxwellCuse]

I don't think it would matter stipend-wise because tuition, fees, room, board, and books get subtracted from TCOA. Whoever writes the tuition checks would get a break, though.

OK, this answers my question indirectly. SU is shooting itself in the foot (or maybe its just a glancing blow) by lumping "supplies" in with books. $1400 is on the high side for books alone. $900 -- $1000 make more sense. Add $500 to the stipend then for supplies and its a bit more reasonable.

I think I'll go check some common data sets to see how recently places like Tennessee, etc. bumped up their (obscenely high) indirect costs like transportation and personal costs (you can't buy too much deodorant in humid Knoxville!).

 

[Lawrinson14]

OK, this answers my question indirectly. SU is shooting itself in the foot (or maybe its just a glancing blow) by lumping "supplies" in with books. $1400 is on the high side for books alone. $900 -- $1000 make more sense. Add $500 to the stipend then for supplies and its a bit more reasonable.

I think I'll go check some common data sets to see how recently places like Tennessee, etc. bumped up their (obscenely high) indirect costs like transportation and personal costs (you can't buy too much deodorant in humid Knoxville!).

It seems so counterintuitive to me. Indirect and personal costs should be waaaay higher at a private school like SU. I can only imagine the wealth disparity between the average NJ/Long Island SU student and the average student at Tennessee. There is no way that those in Tennessee are outspending SU students on indirect and personal costs.

 

[SUFan44]

Does SU still offer the football players an unlimited SUpercard?

You can't put a price on that.

#Kimmel4Life

Was friends with a women's soccer player and at the end of the semester we hit up Schine for anything and everything, there was so much left on her SUpercard. Was a pretty great deal.

 

[xc84]

Is this a realistic option for SU? I have no idea what the pros and cons would be other than those I mentioned above.

I don't think it is a realistic option for the state which would have to subsidize SU's tuition if it became public. And do we really want SU part of SUNY? I don't think that would be an answer.

 

[Oakland]

That would create a market for players, with boosters paying.

This could be so much simpler if they just let the players profit from their own name and likeness.

 

[OttoinGrotto]

That would create a market for players, with boosters paying.

Yes, it would.

 

[TheCusian]

I think it pushes us further into the "looking for kids and families that value education" vs kids who just want to play football.

The total value (stipend + scholarship value) will be higher than most schools as it costs a crapton to go to Syracuse. I'd bet that families that already have some wealth or families with strong cores and value systems (not worried about stipend as much and more likely to value expensive education) will like us more.

 

[xc84]

That would create a market for players, with boosters paying.

In addition it creates a very class-divided team. The stars get a lot of money and the non-stars get nada. I doubt that would be good.

 

[xc84]

I think it pushes us further into the "looking for kids and families that value education" vs kids who just want to play football.

The total value (stipend + scholarship value) will be higher than most schools as it costs a crapton to go to Syracuse. I'd bet that families that already have some wealth or families with strong cores and value systems (not worried about stipend as much and more likely to value expensive education) will like us more.

So we target wealthy kids who want a good education? Might not be a recipe for a good football or basketball team.

 

[javadoc]

I think it pushes us further into the "looking for kids and families that value education" vs kids who just want to play football.

The total value (stipend + scholarship value) will be higher than most schools as it costs a crapton to go to Syracuse. I'd bet that families that already have some wealth or families with strong cores and value systems (not worried about stipend as much and more likely to value expensive education) will like us more.

It may very well strengthen that trend, in which case there is about to be a ferocious dogfight over that pool of players. SU, BC, Northwestern, Stanford, Duke, Vanderbilt, etc. all scrapping over scarce resources.