AAC supports cost of attendance

[Fishy]

But is against pay-for-play.

Random press release in the past hour....

PROVIDENCE - The American Athletic Conference has issued a statement following a meeting in Dallas last week of many of the major football conferences in the country. A main point was a need to change the NCAA Division I governance structure, something the American's presidents and athletic directors support.

"The American Athletic Conference strongly supports the continued open dialogue and examination of the NCAA Division I governance structure. As we seek improvements to our governance and enforcement models, our focus must be on the enhancement of the student-athlete experience while striving to maintain a clear line of demarcation between intercollegiate athletics and professional sports. The promotion of health and safety standards for our student-athletes and a strong commitment to their educational and personal development are of paramount importance. To those ends, we support, among other things, funding student-athlete scholarships up to the full cost of attendance, but we are firmly against the 'pay-for-play' model."

 

[WestHartHusk]

But is against pay-for-play.

Random press release in the past hour....

PROVIDENCE - The American Athletic Conference has issued a statement following a meeting in Dallas last week of many of the major football conferences in the country. A main point was a need to change the NCAA Division I governance structure, something the American's presidents and athletic directors support.

"The American Athletic Conference strongly supports the continued open dialogue and examination of the NCAA Division I governance structure. As we seek improvements to our governance and enforcement models, our focus must be on the enhancement of the student-athlete experience while striving to maintain a clear line of demarcation between intercollegiate athletics and professional sports. The promotion of health and safety standards for our student-athletes and a strong commitment to their educational and personal development are of paramount importance. To those ends, we support, among other things, funding student-athlete scholarships up to the full cost of attendance, but we are firmly against the 'pay-for-play' model."

Then this is against what I have heard Herbst say - I swear I heard her say we are up for that during an interview.

 

[huskymedic]

But is against pay-for-play.

Random press release in the past hour....

PROVIDENCE - The American Athletic Conference has issued a statement following a meeting in Dallas last week of many of the major football conferences in the country. A main point was a need to change the NCAA Division I governance structure, something the American's presidents and athletic directors support.

"The American Athletic Conference strongly supports the continued open dialogue and examination of the NCAA Division I governance structure. As we seek improvements to our governance and enforcement models, our focus must be on the enhancement of the student-athlete experience while striving to maintain a clear line of demarcation between intercollegiate athletics and professional sports. The promotion of health and safety standards for our student-athletes and a strong commitment to their educational and personal development are of paramount importance. To those ends, we support, among other things, funding student-athlete scholarships up to the full cost of attendance, but we are firmly against the 'pay-for-play' model."

Not so random... putting it out to coincide with the CFP/Commissioner meetings this week in DC.

http://sportsillustrated.cnn.com/college-football/news/ncaa-overhaul/

"The pillar that everyone seems to be in agreement on is taking better care of student-athletes without paying them. Perlman stressed that there's no momentum toward paying athletes. But by separating the Big 5 in terms of governance, those schools may be able to better care for their athletes, be it with a cost of attendance policy, a stipend or something as simple as making more food available.

"The fact is that with all this revenue that we have, we can spend it on anything we want under current NCAA regulations, except to benefit student-athletes," Perlman said. "That's where we're regulated and prevented from doing things. I'm not saying we're going to pay them. None of us would agree to that. But there are a variety of areas to have opportunities among the five to consider the rules we want to live with."

 

[nelsonmuntz]

Aresco wouldn't make a press release that was not pre-approved by the P5 commissioners.

 

[huskymedic]

Then this is against what I have heard Herbst say - I swear I heard her say we are up for that during an interview.

I could have always missed something but I haven't seen UConn come out against it (funding student-athlete scholarships up to the full cost of attendance) - more questioning process/methodology than anything.

http://today.uconn.edu/blog/2013/09/manuel-leads-huskies-through-changing-times-in-athletics/

 

[CTMike]

I'm OK with the general premise that they like FCOA scolarships and not pay for play. At the same time though I think it's BS that the kids aren't allowed to profit from their name or likeness, or play 20 minutes in church league hoops, and all the other insane rules that the NCAA seems to make up and enforce on the fly.

 

[upstater]

The headwinds against the allowance are going to be remarkable. Unless I'm mistaken, the ADs are making a lot of this up.

Well, the cost of attendance is an official number that is required by the federal DOE. You can't just make it up out of thin air. And they will stick to that number because going beyond that makes the players subject to taxation. So, the schools have the option. They can raise the official cost of attendance (tuition + fees + room & board) to a level sufficient to give the players and extra $4k. But this would require keeping tuition low while jacking up fees for everyone else (i.e. all other students). This would create absolute havoc for those students who are only receiving student loans or scholarship/financial aid up to the amount of tuition/R&B and not fees. Or, even weirder, if they fluff up the fees with hot air (i.e. costs that a regular student will not otherwise incur, like gym time = $1.5k) then they are going to make their schools look a lot more expensive to prospective students. Maybe this will all fly in the SEC but it will not fly up north.

The amount of stipend is not a number the AD can just make up out of thin air. It is a federal requirement to report cost-of-attendance officially (i.e. a set amount of fees over and above tuition).

If they really wanted to do something for players, they would eliminate and ban all weekday football games even if that means the football coach earns a smaller salary.

They would also need to do something commensurate for bball players traveling all over the place.

In other words, spare me the talk of helping student athletes.