NJCuse97
Once Thought to be Taylor Ham Campanile Prophet
- Joined
- Nov 21, 2014
- Messages
- 3,413
- Like
- 6,115
I will try and find the threadAre you sure these numbers are accurate? Students paying $2-3k a year seems way too much for an athletic fee
I will try and find the threadAre you sure these numbers are accurate? Students paying $2-3k a year seems way too much for an athletic fee
OK thank you. This is more than twice what my "straw man" assumes, so the 25% funding is more like 50% funding, but it's the local fanbase that props it up.
Just so we're clear, I am on the side of a great gameday experience in the mold of the best that college football has to offer. I don't have a problem with a student fee helping fund the AD and didn't mind when I was paying it as a student. Of course I would prefer them to be loud and proud the whole game, but don't take that and everything else the tuition funded university offers and suggest (not that you did) that those who fund 50% of the AD budget through tuition payments don't deserve a seat in the Dome their tuition has been refurbishing (that roof money didn't come from the AD and the state only covered about 20% or the second phase - the seats). They are the VIPs who pay the bills including those of the AD, whether they show up on time or not. IIRC the AD leases time in the Dome, so they do not see the revenue driven by ticket sales. I assume the ticket sales impact the lease rates, but the Dome is a separate entity from the AD.
And yes, money rules it all, and yes they were moved to make it easier for others to pay more for seats elsewhere.
So are we just going to say every player who commits elsewhere isn’t DART?It's fine. Fran isn't going to take a kid that doesn't fit. Not just as a player but more importantly as a teammate.
Next
Yes 100%So are we just going to say every player who commits elsewhere isn’t DART?
What other possible conclusion could we come to?So are we just going to say every player who commits elsewhere isn’t DART?
none and it makes things so much easier. Every recruit that we pursue and don't get is simply not DART. It's inconceivable that Fran would lose a recruit he truly wanted and who was DART.What other possible conclusion could we come to?
none and it makes things so much easier. Every recruit that we pursue and don't get is simply not DART. It's inconceivable that Fran would lose a recruit he truly wanted and who was DART.