How Much More Affordable Would College Be

[miri]

Originally posted by: bignateyk
obviously a good chunk of the money will be filtered right back into athletics, but if you think that the amount of money the programs bring to the schools doesnt offset the cost of a few scholarships, think again.

that might work for big football and basketball schools but not others

I graduated from VCU, a school with around 30k students, and their athletic department does not bring much revenue at all, and I doubt it comes anywhere near paying for the athletic scholarships, coaching salaries and team expenses. Have you ever heard of a VCU team?

 

[DaShen]

Originally posted by: Gibsons
The athletic dept at many schools turns a profit.

Exactly

 

[GasX]

I'd like to take this a step further. I think we need to remove ALL incentive to exercise from society. We can't be too far from the day when scientists allow us to exist as a brain in a jar and work telepathically...

 

[slsmnaz]

What is also being ignored is the huge benefit the sports events are for the local economy. At the UT/Cal game on Sat. there were "only" 106,000 in the stands but there were probably double that just in town for the festivities. From a guy who bartended his way through college, these games paid for my schooling.

 

[kranky]

What WOULD make a difference is if students refused to take on giant piles of debt and chose affordable schools. The only reason tuition keeps rising at far more than the general inflation rate is that they know students will just borrow more money, and not choose a different school.

 

[nycxandy]

Originally posted by: miri

Originally posted by: bignateyk
obviously a good chunk of the money will be filtered right back into athletics, but if you think that the amount of money the programs bring to the schools doesnt offset the cost of a few scholarships, think again.

that might work for big football and basketball schools but not others

I graduated from VCU, a school with around 30k students, and their athletic department does not bring much revenue at all, and I doubt it comes anywhere near paying for the athletic scholarships, coaching salaries and team expenses. Have you ever heard of a VCU team?

VCU 2004-2005
Revenues: $8,869,907
Expenses: $8,545,534

 

[RaiderJ]

I think if schools got rid of the scholarships and such for the silly degree programs we would all be better off. That and the mentality that everyone deserves a higher education. Having a bunch of kids go to school just to screw off is expensive, especially when a good part of their tuition is subsidized by taxpayers.

 

[Inspector Jihad]

I go to temple and we have the last ranked football team in division I. They are terrible. But they still bring in lots of money.

 

[xanis]

Originally posted by: Mwilding
I'd like to take this a step further. I think we need to remove ALL incentive to exercise from society. We can't be too far from the day when scientists allow us to exist as a brain in a jar and work telepathically...

In case you haven't watched the news in a long time, America is falling behind in education. We're ranked pretty low in the world for academic acheivments, so having more brains in this country is a GOOD thing. Also, I do know that America has one of the highest if not the highest obesity rate in the world, but sending some jocks who could care less about education to college and help the school turn a $25M profit hardly has anything to do with encouraging exercise.

 

[fLum0x]

Originally posted by: tweakmm
The athletic program brings in money, fool.
/thread

which means you think they ought to pay collegiate atheletes?

no. if college athletic departments were not so tight with there money, they could invest it in buildings or things for the university. I agree that it would save money, ALTHOUGH, i do not think it would make much of a difference. Look at purdue university...there are 50 something college football players with full rides maybe? so 50 * 20k = 1 million.

1 million dollars divided by 40,000 students = $25.

now given, there is more than football at college for sure...but for 1 sport, lets say you average $25 for each student at the university if you cut out the scholarship. Let's give the university the benefit of the doubt and say there are 10 sports that every single person has a full ride for. That is 10 * 25 = 250 per student. So yes, it would save you $250 a year, but what difference does that make when you are paying $20,000 to go there....

 

[alkemyst]

Originally posted by: Paddington
I might believe that, say, American football or basketball is making money off ticket sales and perhaps TV revenues to pay for its program. But are they also funding the scholarships, or is that money coming out of other student's tuition? It's hard to say.

Also, do you mean to tell me that these other sports like women's volleyball (or for that matter, most women's sports), rowing, golf, wrestling, swimming, baseball, etc. make money off ticket revenues to pay for them? Yeah right, at most schools no one attends those games. They are free and people still don't go. You're talking about a lot of money to pay the way for all those students, plus pay for facilities, coaches salaries, tickets, hotel rooms, etc.

100% of those on a sports team are not on a free ride, that's your first incorrect assumption.

As saying most of the students on these teams are idiots, is equally retarded. One there is a minimum GPA most of these people have to carry and second most are not looking to go Pro so they are building their academic resumes properly.

Did a player steal the girl you wanted or something?

Å

 

[SpanishFry]

do you realize the athlete full scholarship/student population % is miniscule at a school like OSU?

 

[nycxandy]

Originally posted by: fLum0x

Originally posted by: tweakmm
The athletic program brings in money, fool.
/thread

which means you think they ought to pay collegiate atheletes?

no. if college athletic departments were not so tight with there money, they could invest it in buildings or things for the university. I agree that it would save money, ALTHOUGH, i do not think it would make much of a difference. Look at purdue university...there are 50 something college football players with full rides maybe? so 50 * 20k = 1 million.

1 million dollars divided by 40,000 students = $25.

now given, there is more than football at college for sure...but for 1 sport, lets say you average $25 for each student at the university if you cut out the scholarship. Let's give the university the benefit of the doubt and say there are 10 sports that every single person has a full ride for. That is 10 * 25 = 250 per student. So yes, it would save you $250 a year, but what difference does that make when you are paying $20,000 to go there....

The Purdue football department made over $11 million last year. Without scholarships they wouldn't be able to field a team that's good enough to generate that kind of money.

 

[Kirby]

University of Alabama: Total athletic revenues were $62.3 million in 2005, while expenses were $49.8 million

 

[tweakmm]

Originally posted by: fLum0x

Originally posted by: tweakmm
The athletic program brings in money, fool.
/thread

which means you think they ought to pay collegiate atheletes?

That is exactly what I meant. :thumbsup:
I'm surprised someone figured it out because I really hid my true message deep.

 

[nycxandy]

Originally posted by: Paddington

Originally posted by: Xanis
You're right, the number of athletic scholarships outnumbers the academic ones. Why? Because most of America has different priorites than some. I agree with your argument here 110% in that most of the athletic scholarships are for kids that shouldn't even deserve to go to college. However, it's not going to change.

At Ohio State, if anyone says anything remotely negative about any facet of the school's atheletic program, the locals will go apeshit and lynch you from the nearest tree. The corruption of college with sports in this state just seems to be ridiculous. I think New York has it right with their SUNY schools that focus on academics first.

I go to a SUNY, but I would rather have it the other way and attend a Big Ten school with a huge football/basketball program.

 

[JS80]

Originally posted by: Queasy
I dunno...why don't you pull up the numbers on the millions that athletic departments bring in for schools and tell us.

Athletic departments pay for athletic scholarships on their own.

I would think they subsidize all the other scholarships.

Better question is, if the federal government didn't subsidize tuition for "poor people" how much cheaper would it be. Not to mention bloated professor salaries...

 

[b0mbrman]

Originally posted by: nycxandy

Originally posted by: miri

Originally posted by: bignateyk
obviously a good chunk of the money will be filtered right back into athletics, but if you think that the amount of money the programs bring to the schools doesnt offset the cost of a few scholarships, think again.

that might work for big football and basketball schools but not others

I graduated from VCU, a school with around 30k students, and their athletic department does not bring much revenue at all, and I doubt it comes anywhere near paying for the athletic scholarships, coaching salaries and team expenses. Have you ever heard of a VCU team?

VCU 2004-2005
Revenues: $8,869,907
Expenses: $8,545,534

Nicely done

 

[miri]

Originally posted by: b0mbrman

Originally posted by: nycxandy

Originally posted by: miri

Originally posted by: bignateyk
obviously a good chunk of the money will be filtered right back into athletics, but if you think that the amount of money the programs bring to the schools doesnt offset the cost of a few scholarships, think again.

that might work for big football and basketball schools but not others

I graduated from VCU, a school with around 30k students, and their athletic department does not bring much revenue at all, and I doubt it comes anywhere near paying for the athletic scholarships, coaching salaries and team expenses. Have you ever heard of a VCU team?

VCU 2004-2005
Revenues: $8,869,907
Expenses: $8,545,534

Nicely done

can you link where you got your information?

that is surprising, I remember they kept sending me emails with incentives for students to attend games. I remember one game they were giving away free tuition for a student that attended the game.

 

[Queasy]

Originally posted by: nkgreen
University of Alabama: Total athletic revenues were $62.3 million in 2005, while expenses were $49.8 million

And they just unveiled a major stadium expansion and upgrade this past weekend that was payed entirely by private donations and bonds that the athletic dept is paying off.

 

[Queasy]

Ivy League Schools don't offer athletic scholarships and they aren't exactly cheap.

 

[senseamp]

Ivy Leagues don't give out athletic scholarships. Doesn't seem to make them more affordable, and their sport teams suck for the most part.

 

[wyvrn]

Originally posted by: Paddington
I was wondering how much more cheaper college would be if they got rid of athletic scholarships for jocks, and maybe if they went a step further and got rid of some of these atheletic programs period.

Sure they have academic scholarships too, but these seem to be far fewer in number. Also I have less objection to giving scholarships on an academic basis. Giving money to someone who comes to your college to play a game just seems retarded, especially if its breaking the bank for so many other students who actually pay their own way, putting them into debt for years to come.

Also, I hate to say it, but some of these atheletes really have no business being in college in the first place. Not all of them, but many of them make so little use of their education, and are taking up a class seat that someone else might have benefitted from.

Maybe this is why American education has lost its way, what with tuition going up 3-5 times the rate of inflation consistently for the past 20 years, without any real results seen in better achievement.

I'll edit your paper for you:

First, athletics is a valuable extra-carricular activity much like art. With the obesity epidemic in America, athletics is a very valuable program. Even simple PE/tennis class should be required for college graduation.

Most of the big programs support their own athlets and stadiums. So to say that the college is giving money to athletes isn't right. Many times, the athletic accomplishments of a team bring recognition to a school that otherwise would be 'just another school'. We are talking money, buildings, and attracting new students and professors.

Most athletes never make it to the pros and get paid. Their educations are all they have to stand on, and it is stereotypical to call an athlete dumb. Just because you can bounce a basketball or run fast around a track doesn't mean you cannot be smart or hard-working. Athletics is often the only way poor students can pay for college, so it is an opportunity equalizer.

You seem to be blaming tuition hikes on athletics (because you don't tie in any other reasons). I bet if you did a study, you would see the cost of hikes at most institutions comes from the didactic side mostly, ie: attracting better professors, constructing better libraries, paying for state-of-the-art equipment like miscrosoopes and computers.

Now turn that in and go get an A.

 

[jlbenedict]

Lastnight, during the Florida St. / Miami game, one of the television commentators mentioned that one of Florida St's cornerback's has earned Straight A's since 9th grade..

I guess he's an idiot jock too, right?

 

[IceBergSLiM]

you fail at critical thinking.