Menu
What's new
By:
Filters
AllBuffs | Unofficial fan site for the University of Colorado at Boulder Athletics programs

This is a sample guest message. Register a free account today to become a member! Once signed in, you'll be able to participate on this site by adding your own topics and posts, as well as connect with other members through your own private inbox!

  • Prime Time. Prime Time. Its a new era for Colorado football. Consider signing up for a club membership! For $20/year, you can get access to all the special features at Allbuffs, including club member only forums, dark mode, avatars and best of all no ads ! But seriously, please sign up so that we can pay the bills. No one earns money here, and we can use your $20 to keep this hellhole running. You can sign up for a club membership by navigating to your account in the upper right and clicking on "Account Upgrades". Make it happen!

Colleges spending big $$$ on their athletes

Hugegroove

Hugegroove

Club Member
Club Member
Found this article and had no clue this kind of $$$ is spent on collage athletes. Interesting enough their data stated that the P-12 average spends 6 figures on each athlete. If this is true, I find it amazing that any school has any $$$ in their athletic fund. Even though it wasn't mentioned in the article, obviously private donations are a big part of the amount spent on athletes in the SEC. I now wonder what the figure is for our student athletes? :wow:



http://news.yahoo.com/study-highlights-spending-gaps-ncaa-060654300--spt.html
 
Wouldn't a lot of that money be "on paper?" The bulk of it, I'd imagine, is for tuition. Or does the AD have to reimburse the school for the tuition?

It looks like the way the calculate it is total expenditures divided my number of athletes. $50,000,000 spent / 500 athletes = $100,000 per athlete.
 
Last edited:
DBT said:
Wouldn't a lot of that money be "on paper?" The bulk of it, I'd imagine, is for tuition. Or does the AD have to reimburse the school for the tuition?

It looks like the way the calculate it is total expenditures divided my number of athletes. $50,000,000 spent / 500 athletes = $100,000 per athlete.
Click to expand...


It looks to me like they are taking the athletic department budget, and dividing by the total number of scholarship athletes, to arrive at a "per athlete" figure.
 
Lt.Col.FrankSlade said:
It looks to me like they are taking the athletic department budget, and dividing by the total number of scholarship athletes, to arrive at a "per athlete" figure.
Click to expand...
Yeah, something along those lines anyway. Seems like a simplistic way of looking at it to me.
 
Also, "academic spending" can be a confusing category, though the study uses federal data universities must report under a precise methodology. While it includes athletic scholarships as athletic spending, for example, institutional financial aid available to other students doesn't count as "academic spending."


​
 
I get the tuition, books, uniforms, meals, travel, and covering insurance costs for injuries. But it still seems like a high price to pay. I doubt there is an accurate published breakdown of what those costs truly are.
 
DBT said:
Wouldn't a lot of that money be "on paper?" The bulk of it, I'd imagine, is for tuition. Or does the AD have to reimburse the school for the tuition?

It looks like the way the calculate it is total expenditures divided my number of athletes. $50,000,000 spent / 500 athletes = $100,000 per athlete.
Click to expand...

I believe that not only does the school have the reimburse the school for tuition they pay out of state rates for all scholarship athletes if they are out of state or not.

I would double check with a recruiting guru.
 
tante said:
I believe that not only does the school have the reimburse the school for tuition they pay out of state rates for all scholarship athletes if they are out of state or not.

I would double check with a recruiting guru.
Click to expand...

This is correct. The AD could save about 25% on scholarship cost if they could get the reimbursement rate down to the "True cost of education".
 
tante said:
I believe that not only does the school have the reimburse the school for tuition they pay out of state rates for all scholarship athletes if they are out of state or not.

I would double check with a recruiting guru.
Click to expand...

CUAD pays out of state on all athletes...total bull**** move by the school
 
Hugegroove said:
Even the in-state kids that they recruit? Seems double dumb to do that.
Click to expand...

yep...school just wants the cash from the AD...i would think that the school could waive the tuition fees for all athletes so that the AD would have more $$ to spend on other sports
 
Yes. When we did our OV we got an estimate of about 400k+ for athletes expenses. Crazy part is they do find ways to recover. Like for insurance. The athletes are required to carry primary insurance and CUstomers is secondary. If the kids don't have, they have to pay. Don't get this one.
 
BlackNGold said:
This is correct. The AD could save about 25% on scholarship cost if they could get the reimbursement rate down to the "True cost of education".
Click to expand...

I really want to agree with this line of thinking.

But then there is the reality that USC and Stanford, both private schools, have tuition near $28,000.

The out of state price at CU is around $20,000.

IMO, it would be equally BS to reflect instate tuition for the instate kids because that rate is heavily subsidized. The CUAD doesn't need more protesters from Colorado's hypersensative taxpayer base.

Even CU's OOS fee might be subsidized to some extent by Uncle Bruce's federal grant money.
 
Going by the methodology used I would guess that the CU Health Sciences spends over $250,000 per student. If you take the entire budget of Health Sciences including salaries of all employees, marketing, utilities and the huge expenditures made recently for facilities you might even get over $1,000,000 a student.

The piece is a hack job that does not in any way reflect the actual financial expenditures of athletics, the revenues, or the role of athletics.
 
Here is another thing to consider. Getting a degree in Liberal Arts is around 20K per year for out of state. For business/engineering/architecture it is around 36K per year. So, if that comes out of the AD, why would the AD want a kid to go for one of the more expensive degree programs? Another thing, do you think the SEC schools play by the same rules? I mean, does the AD get hit for the scholly costs like, say, a CU or Stanford does?
 
If the calculation is total AD budget divided by scholarship athletes, umm... what about non-scholarship athletes? A lot of the non-revenue sports have several non-scholarship athletes on them, and the AD has to buy their uniforms, pay their travel, pay the trainer to tape their ankles, etc - just because they aren't covering any tuition costs doesn't mean that there are no costs at all.

I just have trouble with an article that right off the top has a major methodological error in the reporting, especially when that error helps to "make their point."
 
skibum said:
If the calculation is total AD budget divided by scholarship athletes, umm... what about non-scholarship athletes? A lot of the non-revenue sports have several non-scholarship athletes on them, and the AD has to buy their uniforms, pay their travel, pay the trainer to tape their ankles, etc - just because they aren't covering any tuition costs doesn't mean that there are no costs at all.

I just have trouble with an article that right off the top has a major methodological error in the reporting, especially when that error helps to "make their point."
Click to expand...

and this is different from 90% of media reporting how?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top