Cost-of-attendance: McNamara @ Providence Journal

[RF1]

Interesting items from the article:

Cost of Admission
URI -$3,194 - limited only to men and women's basketball teams
PC - $1,800 - limited to both men's and women's basketball and hockey teams
Brown - $0 - No Ivy schools will participate
Bryant - $0 - Will not participate - some fellow NEC members such as Robert Morris, Mount St. Mary’s and St. Francis (Pa.) will in men’s and women’s basketball



http://www.providencejournal.com/articl ... sfeed=true

[RF1]

URI will be at a disadvantage in the A-10 for many of its sports outside basketball that do not offer cost of admission stipends.

UMass will provide the additional cost of attendance money to each of its athletes on full or partial scholarship.

The 2015-16 school year is the first when schools can offer the scholarships with added value since the NCAA officially amended its rules in January. Every athlete on full scholarship will receive an additional $1,600 per year to pay for cost of living expenses not previously covered by athletic scholarships. They will be paid in four installments.

UMass Athletic Director Ryan Bamford announced the move via Twitter (@UMassADBamford) and discussed it while watching the UMass men’s basketball team prepare for its trip to Europe next week.

Of UMass’ more than 600 athletes, Bamford said less than 300 receive full or partial scholarships. The total cost to the department will be about $400,000 in 2015, according to Bamford, and could increase to as much as $450,000 as UMass adds scholarships to some of its women’s programs.

Full article via link at:
UMass announces plans to cover full cost of attendance for scholarship athletes
By MATT VAUTOUR
@MattVautourDHG
Tuesday, August 11, 2015
Daily Hampshire Gazette
http://ht.ly/QN82Z

[RF1]

VCU $4,100 average per scholarship student-athlete per year - all 17 varsity sports

VCU to pay an average of $4,100 per scholarship student-athlete in cost of attendance
Posted: Tuesday, April 28, 2015 10:30 pm
By MIKE SZVETITZ Richmond Times-Dispatch

http://www.richmond.com/sports/college/ ... 39556.html

[TruePoint]

I still believe that all schools with revenue-producing sports programs should pay into a pot from which all participating schools would distribute the funds to their athletes on a pro rata basis. It really isn't fair that schools will be able to pay different amounts, and this clearly advantages some schools over others. Doing it my way would solve both problems. I do feel the athletes should be eligible to make something in return for the revenue they produce for their schools, but this model is dumb. I actually think the Olympic model would be worth exploring but they didn't ask me.

[rhodylaw]

Honestly - I doubt 3 or 4 thousand dollars is going to change the game that much. Even less so will be the $1800 across the board UMass offers. I am pleased to see we are very competitive in the one sport we all really care about the most. The other sports will be the same as they are now.

[RF1]

The other sports will be the same as they are now.

In the respect that the other sports will offer no cost of attendance, which was how it has always been in Kingston, it is the same. It however is not the same in recruiting battles with other schools that will now offer cost of attendance stipends. They will have a clear advantage. Some of the other schools are even in the A-10.

[rhodylaw]

Well it's not like we are overly competitive in most sports now - thus it should have little effect.

[RF1]

Well it's not like we are overly competitive in most sports now - thus it should have little effect.

That is a pretty defeatist attitude and will only make things even worse. I guess we should just accept less for all Rhody athletes that do not play hoops. They just don't matter.

[Smokinjimit]

This is the beginning of the end of college sports. The slippery slope.

Too bad to, it was fun while the little guys could knock off the big guys. Like in all things those with the gold make the rules. Don't think for a second that getting 5k from one school compared to 1800 from another school isn't a large factor in a poor 17 or 18 yr olds decision process.

[TruePoint]

Well it's not like we are overly competitive in most sports now - thus it should have little effect.

That is a pretty defeatist attitude and will only make things even worse. I guess we should just accept less for all Rhody athletes that do not play hoops. They just don't matter.

I wouldn't say that, but I would say that if we are ever going to get to a place where we can afford to provide this for all of our scholarship athletes, that money is going to be raised because of men's basketball. So I would rather the investment of whatever resources we have into the basketball program and worry about the other programs later. I also agree with rhodylaw's point that in sports other than basketball, we are not really recruiting nationally at this point, so I'm not sure how much this will really impact our recruiting efforts in those sports. We'll do the best we can in every sport with the student athletes that want to be at URI. If there are a few students a year who would rather be somewhere else because of a couple grand, then we'll just have to figure out a way to survive without them for the time being.

[rambone 78]

Our basketball program: by far the largest revenue producer in the athletic dept.

Maybe in time a few more will get stipends, maybe not.

Football? Not unless they start winning, which of course might have just gotten a little harder to do, when it comes to recruiting here. Not that it's easy anyway, with the current state of the facilities [other than the SADC of course]

[RhowdyRam02]

This is the beginning of the end of college sports. The slippery slope.

Too bad to, it was fun while the little guys could knock off the big guys. Like in all things those with the gold make the rules. Don't think for a second that getting 5k from one school compared to 1800 from another school isn't a large factor in a poor 17 or 18 yr olds decision process.

I think this is too drastic a sentiment. For instance we'll be giving basketball players $3194 a year. Ohio St. is $2970. BC is $1400. Notre Dame $1950. As long as you're a school that can do this you're fine. And one nice thing about this particular way of doing it is it's tied to the same cost of attendance that every student faces, so the biggest schools like your Ohio St's don't want to artificially inflate the number to get a recruiting advantage over other schools. Artificially inflate it and the sticker shock will get average students to look at other schools instead of yours. It's actually a very fair system at the institutional level as long as you can afford it.

[RhowdyRam02]

By the way, here is an interesting article about how the NCAA is helping schools fund this program. Each school will be getting $55,000, so this money will cover just over 17 scholarship athletes at URI.

http://www.usatoday.com/story/sports/co ... /30428777/

[RF1]

No CAA Football team will pay out cost of attendance so URI football will not be at a further disadvantage with respect to the other teams in its league



http://www.richmond.com/sports/article_ ... 086c8.html

[Ramulous]

The Power 5 schools don't like this formulaic system because the amount of the stipend is not uniform.....therefore look for it to change because what the Power 5 says goes....

[Blue Man]

I really don't think this changes anything. Maybe if anything at the smaller schools - but if you don't think these "students" aren't getting something by playing at those bigger schools, I have a bridge in Newport to sell you.

This is just "official" money. About damn time though.

[BFC]

Its not going to matter to kids with rich parents but of course its going to be a factor for everyone else. When its a close decision between two schools and one is going to give $50 a week, the other $100, most 18 year olds without any other revenue source will choose the $100. Ohio State and Urban Meyer are shadier than anyone, and even he's saying using these arbitrary amounts are a problem.

[CTRamfan]

My take is the power 5 conferences will now control the landscape of collegiate sports.

.....The member schools can offer "stipends" in every sport. They can set the amount of the "stipend".
.....Fast forward five years, the fallout will be a strong marriage between the NCAA, TV, and the Power 5 member schools.
The "greedy five" will make sure other, or new D1 football conferences do not share the TV wealth.
In 2020 a "stipend" of possibly $20,000 or more, will weigh mightily in a recruits decision as where to attend.

.....A new collegiate sanctioning group will form to try to level the playing field for all schools, but the money rich, elite 80, programs. THEY HAVE ALREADY WON THE REVENUE BATTLE..
.....We will be in that new group. Our pitching recruits who we can not offer a stipend, will be looking at 20k from Georgia for instance. The four and five star point guards will look at UCLA's large stipend, and the exposure of then exclusive Power 5 conference TV deals and NCAA tournament, while we will be playing on CBS Sports delayed showing 10th channel, hoping to get into the national CARMAX tournament with a new coach, as our is now coaching one of the ELITE 80 teams..

.....Each year the power will shift more in favor of the Power 5 [ELITE 80]........I am sure.

[TruePoint]

Its not going to matter to kids with rich parents but of course its going to be a factor for everyone else. When its a close decision between two schools and one is going to give $50 a week, the other $100, most 18 year olds without any other revenue source will choose the $100. Ohio State and Urban Meyer are shadier than anyone, and even he's saying using these arbitrary amounts are a problem.

You might be right that what we perceive as unsubstantial differences in the cash outlays are actually perceived as real differences by kids. Meyer is probably the shadiest, and his complaints about this being a problem are rooted in him not being able to give enough money. I'm sure if OSU had their cost-of-attendance a little higher he wouldn't be complaining that the system is unfair.

My take is the power 5 conferences will now control the landscape of collegiate sports.

.....The member schools can offer "stipends" in every sport. They can set the amount of the "stipend".
.....Fast forward five years, the fallout will be a strong marriage between the NCAA, TV, and the Power 5 member schools.
The "greedy five" will make sure other, or new D1 football conferences do not share the TV wealth.
In 2020 a "stipend" of possibly $20,000 or more, will weigh mightily in a recruits decision as where to attend.

.....A new collegiate sanctioning group will form to try to level the playing field for all schools, but the money rich, elite 80, programs. THEY HAVE ALREADY WON THE REVENUE BATTLE..
.....We will be in that new group. Our pitching recruits who we can not offer a stipend, will be looking at 20k from Georgia for instance. The four and five star point guards will look at UCLA's large stipend, and the exposure of then exclusive Power 5 conference TV deals and NCAA tournament, while we will be playing on CBS Sports delayed showing 10th channel, hoping to get into the national CARMAX tournament with a new coach, as our is now coaching one of the ELITE 80 teams..

.....Each year the power will shift more in favor of the Power 5 [ELITE 80]........I am sure.

All due respect, I think you are not getting the specifics of how this works. Now, I do agree with you that the Power 5 conferences will continue to consolidate power and resources. That is just the reality of college sports being a Big Business. This is how capitalism works - it crushes the little guy over time. However, the specific issue you raise about the Power 5 paying exorbitant stipends is unlikely to happen under this regime since the cost-of-living number that determines the stipends is shown to all prospective students. So in order to increase the stipend, a school would have to tell all the other high school seniors considering that school that it will cost $20,000 more to go there. I think that is an extremely unlikely thing for a school to do.

[ATPTourFan]

Thx Truepoint for saving me from typing that point regarding cost-of-living vs discretionary stipends.

[RhowdyRam02]

The four and five star point guards will look at UCLA's large stipend, and the exposure of then exclusive Power 5 conference TV deals and NCAA tournament, while we will be playing on CBS Sports delayed showing 10th channel, hoping to get into the national CARMAX tournament with a new coach, as our is now coaching one of the ELITE 80 teams..

I've heard this stated before on this board and it doesn't make any more sense today then it did then. The Power 5 schools are looking for more power and they will always have advantages over schools like us, but make no mistake, the NCAA tournament is not switching to some format where only Power 5 schools are invited and there's a tournament for all the lower tier schools. The TV deal for March Madness that brings in so much money requires a certain amount of games. Why do you think they keep expanding the field instead of contracting it? So they can bring in more money. If we've learned anything from Power 5 schools it's that money is the most important factor. They're not going to restrict the field of teams eligible for the tournament, because that would mean less money.

[BFC]

Its not going to matter to kids with rich parents but of course its going to be a factor for everyone else. When its a close decision between two schools and one is going to give $50 a week, the other $100, most 18 year olds without any other revenue source will choose the $100. Ohio State and Urban Meyer are shadier than anyone, and even he's saying using these arbitrary amounts are a problem.

You might be right that what we perceive as unsubstantial differences in the cash outlays are actually perceived as real differences by kids. Meyer is probably the shadiest, and his complaints about this being a problem are rooted in him not being able to give enough money. I'm sure if OSU had their cost-of-attendance a little higher he wouldn't be complaining that the system is unfair.

I'm not saying Meyer is against it for selfless reasons, I'm just saying it shows these amounts are relevant. Within their own conference Wisconsin players will receive $2,000 more a year than Ohio State players just because their financial aid office used a different calculation method if they even used a method at all. In the ACC, Florida State players will receive almost $5,000 more than Boston College players. Schools with lower numbers are going to have to increase their numbers and just not use them in their marketing to general students. Obviously, schools like Florida State and Cincinnati are already doing that.

[Seawrightspostgame]

FSU is way more than BC?? Makes no sense. Cost of attendance goes up for schools in major cities. The COA for all students is a figure that has existed for a long time.

It's like the Cost of living in the federal government. It reflects the community.

[CTRamfan]

Ah, I stimulated a good discussion.........thanks for the input all.

I guess what I was thinking, is since the bridge has been crossed, the Elite 80, will, with the NCAA"s approval, massage and reinvent this new wrinkle to widen the gap. The rules today will not be the rules in five years.

I can speculate that a new governing body might be formed to protect the interests of the other [including us] 270 D1 schools. No doubt TV contracts will be the driving revenue source. We are positioned well as a basketball program in the A10.
.....[lol]I have sketched a nice 35,000 seat football/soccer stadium though.

[Iggy1979]

I'm just happy that players considering URI, PC, BC and UMass will have to consider the fact that URI will mean $5500-$6000 more for them.

[Rhody72]

Scholarship student athletes are ineligible for student employment and external employment is risky because it can be viewed as a sham job. The basketball season lasts 5 months, and approximately involves 20 hours per week for 20 weeks or 400 hours. $3200 per year is less than minimum wage, and gives student athletes money to live on.

I have no problem with this level of stipend.

[Ramulous]

Who is this Iggy1979?

[rodfromcranston]

It's always summer at Iggy's!

[Keaney.Blue]

Scholarship student athletes are ineligible for student employment and external employment is risky because it can be viewed as a sham job. The basketball season lasts 5 months, and approximately involves 20 hours per week for 20 weeks or 400 hours. $3200 per year is less than minimum wage, and gives student athletes money to live on.

I have no problem with this level of stipend.

20 hours a week! I wish!

[ramfan85]

Is this going to be retroactive? With the market crashing, I could use the money...