Ay-Ziggy-Zoomba.com

Faculty is against us.
and now this....

http://espn.go.com/college-sports/story ... onomy-ncaa

That includes offering stipends for the costs of attending school not covered by scholarships.

Serious question. What costs cannot be covered by scholarships?

Sadly the MAC is, and always has been, fighting a loosing battle. Personally I like the league's model of competitiveness, coaching salaries, etc. but the greed that prevails across the BCS landscape has and will always have the upper-hand. They have the MAC and similar leagues right where they want us: Their foot planted right on the chest as we and, others like us, lay on the ground gasping for air..

pdt1081 wrote:

That includes offering stipends for the costs of attending school not covered by scholarships.

Serious question. What costs cannot be covered by scholarships?

The P5 want to use the COST OF ATTENDANCE figure.

The athletic grant-in-aid covers three items
- Tuition
- Room
- Board
- Out-of-state surcharge (if applicable)

The total COST OF ATTENDANCE includes these three items PLUS
- Books
- Transportation
- Insurance
- Laundry
- Misc. expenses (pizza money, etc)

So when you look at your financial aid award letter and see that you are eligible for $25,000 in financial aid, you have to remember that is NOT your bill. The COST OF ATTENDANCE established by a school has to be reasonable. The P5 schools are not going to be able to have one cost of attendance for football players, one for basketball players, and one for the remainder of the student body.

Generally you have the following -
- Dependent student on-campus
- Dependent student off-campus
- Independent student on-campus
- Independent student off-campus

You would have a plan for students going full-time and part-time. We probably have an additional COA for students that are taking on-line classes. A different plan for students in the Air Force and those using tuition assistance. Things have changed since I last attended a financial aid workshop in 1995.

transfer2BGSU wrote:

pdt1081 wrote:

That includes offering stipends for the costs of attending school not covered by scholarships.

Serious question. What costs cannot be covered by scholarships?

The P5 want to use the COST OF ATTENDANCE figure.

The athletic grant-in-aid covers three items
- Tuition
- Room
- Board
- Out-of-state surcharge (if applicable)

The total COST OF ATTENDANCE includes these three items PLUS
- Books
- Transportation
- Insurance
- Laundry
- Misc. expenses (pizza money, etc)

So when you look at your financial aid award letter and see that you are eligible for $25,000 in financial aid, you have to remember that is NOT your bill. The COST OF ATTENDANCE established by a school has to be reasonable. The P5 schools are not going to be able to have one cost of attendance for football players, one for basketball players, and one for the remainder of the student body.

Generally you have the following -
- Dependent student on-campus
- Dependent student off-campus
- Independent student on-campus
- Independent student off-campus

You would have a plan for students going full-time and part-time. We probably have an additional COA for students that are taking on-line classes. A different plan for students in the Air Force and those using tuition assistance. Things have changed since I last attended a financial aid workshop in 1995.

The P5 schools are not going to be able to have one cost of attendance for football players, one for basketball players, and one for the remainder of the student body.

Sure they can. Either within the NCAA or a new organization. Schools can form their own organization and do anything they want as far as athletics goes. The NCAA is afraid of the P5 because their members bring in almost all of the money. A new basketball tournament with only P5 members may be next. Why should they share their money with other schools. Are people going to the NCAA tournament to see Duke or South Dakota?

The optics of this are terrible from a PR perspective. The P5 would essentially be creating second professional leagues further dmaging the landscape of collegiate sports. We've already seen the geographic boundaries of the traditional conference boundaries destroyed for financial gain...we're now going to see the nail in the coffin of the "student athlete" concept in major college sports.

The practical stumbling block I see to this is Title IX...you can group yorself into whatever pool you want to for scheduling purposes etc...hell, you can go out and secede from the NCAA and set a 125 man roster with 125 scholarships but you can't run from Title IX. If you pay male athletes you have to pay female athletes..using a revenue vs non-revenue model? Good luck with that..no one has ever gotten any traction trying to challenge Title IX using a revenue vs non revenue model. Even with all the $$$ flaoting around these "power" schools, I don't think they have the jack to underwrite the cost of paying athletes of both genders.

Globetrotter wrote:Faculty is against us.

I still think the gripes don't reflect the opinions of the majority of the faculty. They are a vocal minority (as the angry tend to be) but still just that.

It's also funny how the author of that letter is from the Firelands campus. If the university was a body, Firelands would be the deformed third arm that needs to be amputated.

The article is misleading, I think this has to do more with the separation of FBS and FCS. Even still, the P5 schools won't be offering much more than they already have in terms of advantages in facilities, travel capabilities, and I'm sure there are numerous instances of players receiving benefits that go unreported. The sad thing is that if the NCAA is going to place athletes on an even higher pedestal, you're marginalizing your students' educational experience by limiting their resources. Why can't honor students who could bring as much prestige to the school not be offered the same perks? Does this mean that kids from low income families who want to go to college can apply for the same benefits as athletes to help pay for food and travel costs?

The whole thing stinks and its just another way for the NCAA to promote football's big business capabilities without becoming a professional league, which is essentially what the P5 has become for the NFL. I can't imagine this passing as there could be numerous lawsuits filed by families of students who deserve this and won't get it because their son or daughter can't play a sport.