Full cost of attendance passes 79-1

[billybud]

They might lose some sports....

For example...FSU has eight men's sport programs as opposed to UConn's ten (no hockey or soccer)....and ten women's vs UConn's 12 (no hockey or rowing)

But 18 or 19 sports vs the 31 that BC puts up is a big difference.

Note...some schools may play a non varsity team...like FSU plays a Rugby team in the South Independent Rugby Conference

 

[Kolumbo]

The P5 schools don't want to alienate the rest of college football, but I hear they are going to implement a new policy: Only schedule programs getting more than $20 million per year from TV. They can't help it if some schools fall a bit short of that.

 

[upstater]

From USA Today - "The single "No" vote on COA was Boston College, according to a record of the electronic voting provided by the NCAA. BC released a statement late Saturday that said, in part, the school "is concerned with continuing to pass legislation that increases expenses when the vast majority of schools are already institutionally subsidized. The consequence of such legislation could ultimately hurt student-athletes if/when programs are cut. This legislation further segregates student-athletes from the general student population by increasing aid without need-based consideration. Legislation already exists for student-athletes in need through Pell grants and the student-assistance fund."

BC makes excellent points here.

Poor to lower middle class athletes at BC already get $5k.

The new funding doesn't increase those grants. They are offset.

So what we have here are regular students subsidizing upper income athletes.

 

[billybud]

I don't know a major program that runs their athletic scholarship program on a needs based formula.

Chris Weinke, a former pro baseball millionaire driving a $60,000 Escalade, got the same football scholarship that the ghetto kid from central Miami got.

Johnny Football, with his silver spoon background, got the same scholarship as anyone else.

Athletic scholarships, like social security receipt, is not based on need.

 

[upstater]

I don't know a major program that runs their athletic scholarship program on a needs based formula.

Chris Weinke, a former pro baseball millionaire driving a $60,000 Escalade, got the same football scholarship that the ghetto kid from central Miami got.

Johnny Football, with his silver spoon background, got the same scholarship as anyone else.

Athletic scholarships, like social security receipt, is not based on need.

How wrong can you be?

Do you know how scholarship packages work? For every student including athletes?

Any scholarship or Pell Grant that an athlete is eligible for offsets the scholarship commitment that a school makes to the student or student athlete.

You are actually telling me here that schools all over the nation are turning down $5.5k in Pell Grant money? No, Pell grants are part of the full scholarship package for lower income students. This is a federal subsidy. Schools are not going to turn that down. They are not in the business of turning down free money.

 

[billybud]

Pell grants are need based....but they are not athletic scholarships. They are open to all students.

That they may be combined is another thing entirely....the athletic scholarship is not needs based.

 

[Kolumbo]

I agree that BC made valid points and although no other school voted no, I have to believe they do not necessarily support the new plan. It's a shame no other school stood up and voted against it. Any kid getting a free ride can afford some out of pocket expenses and this is most likely not the case with other deserving students.
Eh, the hypocrisy of it all.
I think BC's point is that athletes will be receiving additional funds not based on need, which is wrong.

 

[billybud]

And...Johnny Football did not make less than any kid with an athletic/Pell grant scholarship.

 

[billybud]

If all football players receive the same amount of benefits regardless of personal or family circumstances...obviously those benefits don't derive from need.

How they are packaged may be different...but the end result is that rich kids and poor kids end up with the same total value of benefits.

 

[upstater]

Pell grants are need based....but they are not athletic scholarships. They are open to all students.

That they may be combined is another thing entirely....the athletic scholarship is not needs based.

Sigh. Schools use pell grants to offset the cost of athletic scholarships for poorer students, and anyone who knows what these offers look like knows that they already consider the federally mandated full cost of attendance estimate as part of the package.

In other words, what the schools have done here is increase their federally mandated cost of attendance so as to provide athletes with money beyond tuition and room & board. The schools could NOT elect to simply give stipends of $10k or whatever beyond the federally mandated number, because that would be considered income.

There is a limit as to what they can do in these instances, and those limits are girded by the federally mandated numbers that each school provides.

 

[upstater]

If all football players receive the same amount of benefits regardless of personal or family circumstances...obviously those benefits don't derive from need.

How they are packaged may be different...but the end result is that rich kids and poor kids end up with the same total value of benefits.

I agree with this. They end up with the same total value. But the lower income kids already received more money from the Pell grants. That's why I wrote that what the legislation managed to accomplish is the subsidization of upper income kids by the general population.

 

[pj]

Pell grants are need based....but they are not athletic scholarships. They are open to all students.

That they may be combined is another thing entirely....the athletic scholarship is not needs based.

The athletic scholarship covers everything not covered by federal grants-in-aid.

 

[upstater]

I'll take one thing back on this issue. The legislation accomplished a little more than I gave credit for. The costs last year on the UConn site were $2,500 over and above tuition, and this year they are in the $4ks. This means that factoring in Pell Grants and all the rest, the lower income kids will actually receive up to $1.5 to $2k more than they did last year.

So, if a school like UConn elects to pay the athletes $4.5k, that's $2k more for low income students and $4.5k more for upper income students.

 

[OkaForPrez]

The thing I'm interested the most in is the ability to finance loss of value insurance. If I'm Andre Drummond, do I come to UConn if I can't take out a loan against my future earnings potential to protect against a career ending injury?

UConn needs to be able to offer that, and I don't see why they won't as its not a financial burden, but it needs to be adoptable or we'll be unable to compete for the Diamond Stone's of the future.