The scholarship doesn't cost the University that much (arguably it costs nothing). All the other stuff is stuff employees don't pay for.
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!
Pac 12 players threaten opt-out of 2020 CFB season unless health and safety and other demands are met
- Thread starter Jens1893
- Start date
If the general University actually charges the AD the full out of state tuition costs, I don't see how that cost can be ignored.
How does it not cost the university that much? That is 12 million that is being paid by the athletic department every year to the university? Yes employees have to pay for their own food and medical insurance. Travel and equipment is also an expense to the AD that allows the student athletes to compete at a national level.
This is why I think someone needs to sit the players down and explain the finances to them.
jizzrag85
Well-Known Member
Do they actually pay for the scholarships to the university? I was always under the assumption it was just part of the deal and was free.
jizzrag85
Well-Known Member
Agreed, but this also goes back to some mentioning wanting to remove the student from the athlete which i guess would free up that 12 million? I personally think that’s a giant mistake because trading some cash up front and having no future is something you shouldn’t allow 18 year olds to decide. Kids are dumb, they’ll always take the money and what happens when the NFL doesn’t work out? They might feel they’re being taken advantage of but that education is worth far, far more long term than any cash they could be paid over 4 years.
Yes the university charged out of state tuition for every student athlete. Now is there some wiggle room there because the cost of that scholarship isn’t what is actually charged, yes. But it is still compensation that the AD pays for. The university is profiting from that. Not the AD.
jizzrag85
Well-Known Member
The things you learn everyday, had no idea.
I don't disagree, but telling 18-22 year old kids what is best for them and their future isn't the job of the NCAA or the University. Unfortunately, I would say that at least 50% of P5 scholarship football players (and their parents) have serious aspirations and believe they will make it to the league, so trying to explain the value of the education often falls on deaf ears.
Yes, the university also provides around 10 million in institutional support to the AD through student fees and fund allocation. The way I see it based on the numbers from 2019. Student athletes (football primarily) created a net profit to the AD of 24 million dollars. That doesn’t take into account the expenses the AD pays for facilities charges (12 million), coaching salaries (16 million and yes there is no way they should be that high) and support staff (15 million and again these shouldn’t be that high). So sit back and act like there is all of this money to take away from the AD and give to student athletes is crazy. The only way to do this is to get rid of title 9.
jizzrag85
Well-Known Member
Yup, agreed. The ones really profiting here are the coaches and their agents driving up salaries based off astronomical TV contracts. Coaching salaries need to halved, 15 coaches make 5 million + a year. Dabo makes 9 million, that is absolutely ridiculous.
jizzrag85
Well-Known Member
Right, it isn’t their job which is why I’m nervous with the idea of making them “athletes” and not student athletes. But alas you’re correct about the aspirations, many view school as a necessary evil on the way to a pay day which is troubling. Which is why I just don’t see how it works, these are schools first, their jobs are to educate. The amount of money involved in college football now has ruined that idea and made it all about money. You can’t take a college and turn it into a college and a minor league football league. If that’s what you’re going for then go and make your own league that isn’t associated with the schools.
The school portion should be valued even if they don’t see the value at the time. That’s why I’m on board with a small stipend and ending this absurd rule that they can’t make money off their likenesses.
As I said a few days ago, I think the only way to do this would be to have the football programs somehow separate from the academic part of the Universities, but maintain the University branding because (again this is just my opinion and I know manhattan feels differently) that is what keeps the interest of fans, alumni and donors.
If you took all the BIG and SEC teams, kept all players and coaches in tact, and put them in an XFL-kind of league where they were not branded with the Alabama, Florida, Georgia, Auburn, Ohio State, Michigan, Penn State, etc names, mascots, logos, traditions, etc. NOBODY would watch after the first few games. Fan interest in CFB comes from a sense of pride in their team.
I look at it as a means for college football to still hold the amateurism and have somewhat of what we already have with a a college system. Either way, college football is going to change drastically in the near future. With a farm system or minor leagues, you give that opportunity to kids who really don't want to get an education and those who are completely elite and should be given the opportunity to make money right away. I don't see anything wrong with that. You will still have a larger amount of athletes who have to, or choose to play football collegiality.
It works with every other sport and can work with football. For me, it comes down to paying players. Once you go down that route the whole world of college football changes drastically and they will constantly be asking for more and more, which they should. With a minor league system, colleges can funnel most of that money towards a benefit system (scholarships, higher stipends, insurance for life if needed, job placement help, etc.).
Athlete's tuition is such a red herring. Athletes are the only kids on campus that are charged full out of state tuition. Every normal student gets the random "trustee's scholarship", or some relative equivalent thrown their way. And the numbers are skewed even higher because even the in-state athletes pay out of state tuition to the university. It's simply a way to funnel AD dollars to main campus (being a "non-profit" they have to pretty much spend every dollar every year).
Those numbers also presuppose that not one scholarship athlete would receive academic scholarships or financial aid. And how about private grants or scholarships that athletes could procure on their own? The only reason the AD pays what it does in tuition is because it's designed that way.
Those numbers also presuppose that not one scholarship athlete would receive academic scholarships or financial aid. And how about private grants or scholarships that athletes could procure on their own? The only reason the AD pays what it does in tuition is because it's designed that way.
Great. Maybe part of the discussion should be the University not charging the AD for the scholarships then? As of right now, if the AD is being forced to pay the general university the full out of state tuition, that is still a cost to the AD that comes out of the revenue, and therefore is NOT a red herring. This entire conversation is about how much money is coming into the AD and not going to the players, so I don't see how it's irrelevant.
jizzrag85
Well-Known Member
I think you’re right but I still think that’s a mistake. But, it is what it is so if they value money now over education so be it. I’m just going to hope that if it goes that route it isn’t a huge mistake and we have tons of kids who have some money but no education, the education is so much more valuable.
Agreed on the teams though, I watch the Buffs for the buffs. It’s a sense of pride to see them in the NFL but i don’t watch the NFL for them.
I was unaware that the AD paid full out of state tuition. And this is across every sport? Do all other universities do this? If not, no wonder our AD is broke. The University is looting it.
I would also like to know the answer to this, and not just for the Pac 12, but for the other conferences too. It's a massive amount of money per year that the University is choosing to hamstring the ADs with.
The AD is not broke
class01
Well-Known Member
The #s are from the CDC:
(1) https://data.cdc.gov/NCHS/Provisional-COVID-19-Death-Counts-by-Sex-Age-and-S/9bhg-hcku
(2) https://data.cdc.gov/NCHS/Provisional-Death-Counts-for-Coronavirus-Disease-C/pj7m-y5uh
They were not fabricated by a ghost
How?
That is another issue that nobody is taking into account. The college brand is most of what is driving the value of college football. The players come and go pretty quickly, but regardless fans buy tickets and tune in to watch their teams play regardless of the roster. Without the college, the players would just be playing in a substandard minor league that nobody would watch, nobody would care about, and nobody would make any money from. There is no way you can take a bunch of non-student professionals and stick them on a college branded team, it just won't happen. Take out the top 4 of 5 players from every team, and I would still rather watch college football than whatever forum those top players where playing in.
Really? I can say for sure that the $65,000 a year I have paid for my son to go to school there the last 4 years was real money.
A big reason why many P5 programs “don’t make money” is because of compensation and facility expenditures.
When, at least according to published numbers, a school like CU has a balanced budget where revenue equals debt, how would that work?I'm going to keep on repeating this until it penetrates some apparently very thick skulls:
"Distribute 50% of each sport’s total conference revenue evenly among athletes in their respective sports."
Does NOT equal
"Pay players 50% of revenue."
Yes, paying players 50% of revenue could satisfy that demand, but it's not the only thing that could satisfy that demand.
There are probably 87 million other things that could satisfy that demand other than directly paying the players.
Everything from providing health insurance that extends beyond paying time, guaranteed full, four year scholarships across all sports even if an athlete gets injured, guaranteed full scholarships for other sports, full nutrition programs for other sports, equal academic support across all sports, even adding more scholarship sports, all of that, plus a whole lot more could satisfy that demand.
Give the kids a little credit here - they're NOT "just asking for cash." They are asking that 50% of conference revenues get spent directly, and evenly, across all athletes in all sports.
That's not an unreasonable ask - it really isn't.
Also, wouldn’t there be problems in how the payouts are distributed? If you distribute them evenly among all athletes there will be backlash. If you weight payouts according to revenue produced by a particular sport, there will be a backlash. And if the QB gets more than the LT there will be a backlash.
No system will appease everyone, so there will always be dissatisfaction.
Is your son a part of a team that makes the university $30 million+ a year just for TV?
What difference does that make to the value of a scholarship?
For context the Aerospace Engineering Department brought in $21.2 million in research grants, which is the highest of any engineering department. But then again that is 40 faculty and ~300 graduate students that bring that money in. And each of those graduate students gets free tuition and a monthly stipend to work "20 hours" per week, which like athletes turns into more like 40+ hours per week. Though none of the faculty are making anywhere near what a coach makes, maybe close to a lower assistant coach.