|
euphronius posted:A BA could not really get an less valuable. True. 
|
#
?
Mar 28, 2014 00:07
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 28, 2024 17:47 |
|
|
Yeah, a BA pretty much is just a check in the box and it doesn't matter where it comes from any more. I recently saw an e-mail about a newly hired director who studied at University of Phoenix - Online.
|
|
#
?
Mar 28, 2014 00:18
|
|
|
ryan8723 posted:I wasn't saying they shouldn't get anything ever, just that if athletes unionize in schools that run in the red that they will get nothing. The big schools can afford to treat players as employees. The small schools? Not so much. If you can't do something right, don't do it at all?
|
|
#
?
Mar 28, 2014 00:27
|
|
|
euphronius posted:A BA could not really get an less valuable. Apparently some BAs are now net-negative: http://www.slate.com/blogs/moneybox/2014/03/26/payscale_college_salary_survey_what_school_will_make_you_poorest.html
|
|
#
?
Mar 28, 2014 00:29
|
|
|
ulmont posted:Apparently some BAs are now net-negative: I can't believe UNC-Asheville is on that list. I thought it was a pretty good school. Amazing that Fayetteville State made it for in state tuition! The chart is not clear, but somehow the school only costs 27k and your ROI is -40k, meaning going there actually makes you less valuable than not going to college at all (if I am reading it right, I can't click on the question marks to get more details)! Incredible I wish that list reported by major. Last year my state (NC) wanted to do a study showing the ROI of individual majors at each university, but certain majors (I am sure you can guess which) practically rioted at the idea. Also, I looked it up and at Appalachian State, 13% of the total cost of going to school is direct athletic fees, plus who knows how much more of the costs are hidden. I like sports and all, but that poo poo really makes me mad. Ribsauce fucked around with this message at 01:20 on Mar 28, 2014 |
|
#
?
Mar 28, 2014 01:17
|
|
|
I think that's a terrible way to look at it. I didn't go to college to get a financial return on my investment. I went to learn things. Also there were plenty of things that couldn't possibly be quantified in monetary terms.
|
|
#
?
Mar 28, 2014 02:40
|
|
|
You can't put a price tag on awkward drunken sexual encounters.
|
|
#
?
Mar 28, 2014 02:45
|
|
|
more appropriate around here is you can't put a price on no mom to tell you you're staying up too late playing world of warcraft
|
|
#
?
Mar 28, 2014 02:47
|
|
|
Ask me about the role of Yellow Fever in the Haitian Revolution. I teach English overseas, why do you ask? 
|
|
#
?
Mar 28, 2014 13:56
|
|
|
Sash! posted:I think that's a terrible way to look at it. I didn't go to college to get a financial return on my investment. I went to learn things. Also there were plenty of things that couldn't possibly be quantified in monetary terms. That's fine but in the context of this thread one of the arguments is that players are paid with a chance for a BA. Or a BS too but athletes don't get BSs.
|
|
#
?
Mar 28, 2014 15:01
|
|
|
ryan8723 posted:I wasn't saying they shouldn't get anything ever, just that if athletes unionize in schools that run in the red that they will get nothing. The big schools can afford to treat players as employees. The small schools? Not so much. Protip: Even the overwhelming majority of the "big schools" are in the red when it comes to athletics, at least from an accounting standpoint. It's generally fewer than 5% of D1 programs. I'd like you to explain how you're getting from A-to-B-to-C on this one. Players Unionize-???-Schools disband athletics. Do you think players are going to insist on such a high amount of money (in, as others have said, the alternate future universe where they're looking for salary) that the schools cannot afford to pay it? That doesn't strike you as wildly and obviously counterproductive for those student athletes?
|
|
#
?
Mar 29, 2014 19:23
|
|
|
Sash! posted:I think that's a terrible way to look at it. I didn't go to college to get a financial return on my investment. Well obviously, because PSU.
|
|
#
?
Mar 29, 2014 20:06
|
|
|
Why isn't athletics a major? If theater and music are majors, sports should be a major. You learn poo poo about nutrition, exercising, fuckin anatomy or whatever. Just formalize it and have it count as class credit. Have Business of Sports and Sports Biology and Sports Psychology courses. Even students majoring in other stuff could fill some GE requirements. You should be able to graduate with a BA about as useful as any other.
|
|
#
?
Mar 29, 2014 21:09
|
|
|
That article about net-negative values for Bachelor's of Art degrees is just hilarious but it's a symptom of a larger problem: The U.S. has too many public universities. Realistically, about half of all universities should be shuttered since they cannot provide adequate education. But this will never happen because Also athletics is a major at 98 percent of universities, it's just usually called physical training/physical therapy/human physiology/exercise science and other things.
|
|
#
?
Mar 29, 2014 21:59
|
|
|
The other problem with universities is how much money is dumped into administration and things which do not have to do with the alleged core objective of a university, which is to educate students (and at research universities, to help the population of the state). Just look at the gym on any campus, it is pretty much guaranteed to be by far the nicest gym in the city. Climbing walls, indoor pools., saunas, rows of equipment, etc. At Appalachian State every single student pays 71 dollars a semester just to service the debt on the gym they opened in 2006. That is more than the debt on our dining facilities, student union, our entire transportation system, and probably some other stuff, just for a drat gym!
|
|
#
?
Mar 29, 2014 22:58
|
|
|
Even more reason it should be a major. The athletic facilities get more money than science labs or the library. Gimmie my fuckin BA in Football And Such
|
|
#
?
Mar 29, 2014 23:20
|
|
|
Maintenance and upkeep is ridiculously expensive, too. If you lump in gym facilities with athletic facilities, they cost your average university $10 million a year or more in general maintenance. That could pay for the education of around 200 students for the entire year.
|
|
#
?
Mar 29, 2014 23:21
|
|
|
LARGE THE HEAD posted:Maintenance and upkeep is ridiculously expensive, too. If you lump in gym facilities with athletic facilities, they cost your average university $10 million a year or more in general maintenance. That could pay for the education of around 200 students for the entire year. Fancy recreational facilities are tools for recruiting students and retaining local alumni interest (and donations). There's more space in universities than students to fill it, so they're starting to compete on amenities.
|
|
#
?
Mar 29, 2014 23:25
|
|
|
LARGE THE HEAD posted:Maintenance and upkeep is ridiculously expensive, too. If you lump in gym facilities with athletic facilities, they cost your average university $10 million a year or more in general maintenance. That could pay for the education of around 200 students for the entire year. Are you just making up numbers? Edit: To add to this discussion, I am completely for having a decent gym at a University. To build initially, it adds a little bit more to student fees, but it encourages good habits and helps promote physical activity to those who might not have otherwise exercised. For example, I know plenty of people who would never exercise if the gym didn't have a climbing wall, raquetball courts, or a swimming pool. Also, I'm not sure how it's usually done, but if it's a decent school they should be able to fund the gym mostly through private donors. Also, in case anyone is unaware, no state money that would have gone to grants/scholarship/tuition rates/etc can be used for building/maintaining the gym. I'm guessing that's a nationwide thing for state schools, but I know it's true at U of MN (I work for Facilities there). Kalit fucked around with this message at 23:42 on Mar 29, 2014 |
|
#
?
Mar 29, 2014 23:29
|
|
Deteriorata posted:Fancy recreational facilities are tools for Not sure about all of this. I could have cared less how nice the gym was when I was looking for schools. I was looking at location of the school, graduation rates and the scholarship offers I could get.
|
|
|
#
?
Mar 30, 2014 03:08
|
|
|
Breaky posted:Not sure about all of this. I could have cared less how nice the gym was when I was looking for schools. I was looking at location of the school, graduation rates and the scholarship offers I could get. It could be relevant for players but I would guess you would hit diminishing returns really quickly. It does make a good dick waving thing, so that part is probably true.
|
|
#
?
Mar 30, 2014 03:10
|
|
CharlestheHammer posted:It could be relevant for players but I would guess you would hit diminishing returns really quickly. Oh, yeah relevant for recruiting yes. Regular students? I doubt it, but just my opinion.
|
|
|
#
?
Mar 30, 2014 03:11
|
|
|
If a school doesn't have basic amenities like a gym or some kind of recreational facility, that seems like they would have trouble drawing in students based on campus life. Like, no gym or such would raise some red flags in my mind.
|
|
#
?
Mar 30, 2014 03:13
|
|
|
Breaky posted:Not sure about all of this. I could have cared less how nice the gym was when I was looking for schools. I was looking at location of the school, graduation rates and the scholarship offers I could get. http://www.nytimes.com/2010/07/10/education/10education.html?_r=0 The point is that academics only gets them so far, as there are lots of similar colleges with similar academics. Thus they're going for quality-of-life and recreation as a hook to get the last few students they need. Ed: Here's an actual study on the issue: http://www.nber.org/papers/w18745?utm_campaign=ntw&utm_medium=email&utm_source=ntw High-achieving students focus primarily on academics, while those a cut below care more about the gnarly rock-climbing wall than the reputation of the math department. Both fork over the same amount of money, so appealing to the more casual student pays. Deteriorata fucked around with this message at 03:24 on Mar 30, 2014 |
|
#
?
Mar 30, 2014 03:13
|
|
|
LARGE THE HEAD posted:That article about net-negative values for Bachelor's of Art degrees is just hilarious but it's a symptom of a larger problem: The U.S. has too many public universities. Realistically, about half of all universities should be shuttered since they cannot provide adequate education. But this will never happen because They can provide perfectly adequate education but they're not known for sexy degrees. My school is majorly (but not a majority) an engineering school and it's well known for those programs. If you get a history degree from here though you're kinda hosed just as much as if you were from a (more) no-name school. Quality of education does not matter. Ribsauce posted:The other problem with universities is how much money is dumped into administration and things which do not have to do with the alleged core objective of a university, which is to educate students (and at research universities, to help the population of the state). Just look at the gym on any campus, it is pretty much guaranteed to be by far the nicest gym in the city. Climbing walls, indoor pools., saunas, rows of equipment, etc. At Appalachian State every single student pays 71 dollars a semester just to service the debt on the gym they opened in 2006. That is more than the debt on our dining facilities, student union, our entire transportation system, and probably some other stuff, just for a drat gym! I can guarantee you administration costs will be the vast majority of any of those costs you named and yet you spent most of this paragraph complaining about a gym.
|
|
#
?
Mar 30, 2014 03:50
|
|
|
computer parts posted:I can guarantee you administration costs will be the vast majority of any of those costs you named and yet you spent most of this paragraph complaining about a gym. If people were honest with themselves they would rage against the bureaucrats suckling on the tit of success. But most people in their heart of hearts would like a job with a chair and minimal responsibilities, so, yeah how about those wasteful swimming pools, dogg.
|
|
#
?
Mar 30, 2014 04:52
|
|
|
I'd argue that a fancy-rear end climbing wall is part of the core mission of a university. Educate the body and mind. And given how fat everyone is around here, we're failing at that first one pretty badly.
|
|
#
?
Mar 30, 2014 05:30
|
|
|
Sash! posted:I'd argue that a fancy-rear end climbing wall is part of the core mission of a university. We Are Obese
|
|
#
?
Mar 30, 2014 05:52
|
|
|
Chichevache posted:We Are Obese Pennsylvania is only the 24th most obese state.  Seven of the top 10 are SEC states.
|
|
#
?
Mar 30, 2014 07:26
|
|
|
I'm late to the party here. But individual schools having their own unions does scare me a bit. As much as I agree that "student"-athletes should be getting compensation. I only fear that different schools having different unions will either: a.) create an pay race, with big schools and boosters bringing big MLB-esque money to recruits. It's doubtful, but if more courts side with "student"-athletes on different schools I see no reason for it not to happen. b.) if school's athletes do unionize nothing is stoping that school from now "firing" these students and hiring others. I mean they're two extremes, but I think the NCAA needs to get its head out of it's rear end and realize students need to be compensated. And have some sort of equal pay for all positions and schools, or salary cap. Or continue to not pay players but let them get paid with endorsement deals similar to the Olympics.
|
|
#
?
Mar 30, 2014 07:50
|
|
|
I just want to take this opportunity to remind everyone that ttu has a lazy river on our campus.
|
|
#
?
Mar 30, 2014 12:01
|
|
|
computer parts posted:I can guarantee you administration costs will be the vast majority of any of those costs you named and yet you spent most of this paragraph complaining about a gym. I am well aware administrative costs are crazy at universities and increase at a much faster percentage than instructional costs. I was looking at the financial statements for my school and the gym was broken out nice and conveniently, so that is what I picked for just a random example. I also picked it because when I was in school the gym was the hot university arms race. One state college opened a fancy one with a climbing wall, pools etc. and within 2 years I think every other school broke ground on their own. I think the new arms race is fancy dorms.
|
|
#
?
Mar 30, 2014 15:21
|
|
|
Ribsauce posted:I am well aware administrative costs are crazy at universities and increase at a much faster percentage than instructional costs. I was looking at the financial statements for my school and the gym was broken out nice and conveniently, so that is what I picked for just a random example. I also picked it because when I was in school the gym was the hot university arms race. One state college opened a fancy one with a climbing wall, pools etc. and within 2 years I think every other school broke ground on their own. I think the new arms race is fancy dorms. Student housing is a legitimate problem as almost every college has more students who want to live on campus than they have dorms E: I feel as though we may have gotten off track a bit
|
|
#
?
Mar 30, 2014 15:36
|
|
|
Ribsauce posted:I am well aware administrative costs are crazy at universities and increase at a much faster percentage than instructional costs. I was looking at the financial statements for my school and the gym was broken out nice and conveniently, so that is what I picked for just a random example. I also picked it because when I was in school the gym was the hot university arms race. One state college opened a fancy one with a climbing wall, pools etc. and within 2 years I think every other school broke ground on their own. I think the new arms race is fancy dorms. That's very true, there really is an arms race for amenities on college campuses. In large part, I think, because few students seem to care how large their loans are until they come due. But that's a totally different conversation about the cost of attending college as opposed to college athletics.
|
|
#
?
Mar 30, 2014 16:55
|
|
|
Declan MacManus posted:Student housing is a legitimate problem as almost every college has more students who want to live on campus than they have dorms It is tangentially related as the main reason a lot of athletic programs are in the red is that they're deemed separate institutions by the university. If they received support from the university like Every Other Program on Campus instead of having to be entirely self-sufficient, there wouldn't be a problem. Hell, at my university they did the same thing with the dining program - for ~~Reasons~~ it had to be entirely self sufficient, and when it was deemed that it couldn't escape the red, it was sold off to a private company. Thoguh posted:That's very true, there really is an arms race for amenities on college campuses. In large part, I think, because few students seem to care how large their loans are until they come due. But that's a totally different conversation about the cost of attending college as opposed to college athletics. It's not true. Actually, if you want a good example of why not, look at the postal system - there are a few profitable parts of it (mostly cities, etc), and a lot of unprofitable parts. However, the profitable parts actually are so profitable that they (more or less) counteract the losses from the other areas. Now what would happen if for some reason you decided to group all of the non-profitable parts as a separate entity from the profitable ones? Suddenly we have a budget crisis and we need to cut routes/salaries/etc. computer parts fucked around with this message at 17:01 on Mar 30, 2014 |
|
#
?
Mar 30, 2014 16:59
|
|
|
computer parts posted:It is tangentially related as the main reason a lot of athletic programs are in the red is that they're deemed separate institutions by the university. If they received support from the university like Every Other Program on Campus instead of having to be entirely self-sufficient, there wouldn't be a problem. This goes back to the history issue, as intercollegiate athletics started as a student-run operation outside of faculty control. Despite their best efforts, the faculties have never really gotten it under their own control. Colleges have never had enough money to fund their academic pursuits, and athletics have always depended on gate receipts to stay afloat. Related to that, intercollegiate athletics, and particularly football, proved to be incredibly popular with administrators when it appeared. The first thing they noticed was that incidents of students getting drunk and tearing up the town, and most other off-campus problems, dropped considerably when football appeared, and student academic performance increased. It seemed that students getting wild and crazy for a few weeks in the confines of a stadium each Fall allowed them to burn off a bunch of excess energy and got them more able to focus on their studies. They also noted that the increased esprit de corps created by athletics made for a greater sense of community and commitment to the school from both students and alumni, and made general governance far easier. I posted a comment to that effect from the President of Cornell from 1905 a few days ago in the Football History thread: Jacob Gould Schurman posted:“However strange it may sound to the critics,” he said, “it is nevertheless true that athletics have made it possible to govern, (because athletics have developed an esprit de corps,) hundreds, yes thousands of students in a single university year after year without the help of jury, court, or policeman. If the critics abolished baseball or football we should implore them, in the interest of academic discipline, to devise suitable substitutes or restore these games themselves. So a pretty good argument can be made that athletics do indeed contribute to the academic environment of a college or university, and treating them as a purely mercenary venture is not accurate.
|
|
#
?
Mar 30, 2014 17:15
|
|
|
computer parts posted:It's not true. Have you been on a college campus in the last decade? There is most certainly an amenities arms race. Dorms are being replaced by private suites, workout buildings are being replaced with huge rec centers with poo poo like lazy rivers and climbing walls. Those are big things that universities use to sell prospective students on the school. Here's an article about it from the Chronicle of Higher Education And the abstract of the paper they reference from the National Bureau of Economic Research quote:This paper investigates whether demand-side market pressure explains colleges’ decisions to provide consumption amenities to their students. We estimate a discrete choice model of college demand using micro data from the high school classes of 1992 and 2004, matched to extensive information on all four-year colleges in the U.S. We find that most students do appear to value college consumption amenities, including spending on student activities, sports, and dormitories. While this taste for amenities is broad-based, the taste for academic quality is confined to high-achieving students. The heterogeneity in student preferences implies that colleges face very different incentives depending on their current student body and the students who the institution hopes to attract. We estimate that the elasticities implied by our demand model can account for 16 percent of the total variation across colleges in the ratio of amenity to academic spending, and including them on top of key observable characteristics (sector, state, size, selectivity) increases the explained variation by twenty percent. Thoguh fucked around with this message at 17:49 on Mar 30, 2014 |
|
#
?
Mar 30, 2014 17:46
|
|
|
Deteriorata posted:
I mean if nothing else they're a great advertising tool (how many people do you think went to Alabama or LSU just on the basis of football or because their parents just went on the basis of football).
|
|
#
?
Mar 30, 2014 17:47
|
|
|
Regular students value the perk stuff because they have to use it. Penn State having bonkers ag facilities for academic reasons was immaterial to most of the students because they never saw it. They did, however, have to have a place to sleep.
|
|
#
?
Mar 30, 2014 18:49
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 28, 2024 17:47 |
|
|
kayakyakr posted:I just want to take this opportunity to remind everyone that ttu has a lazy river on our campus. I assume Lubbock is dry or something but do they allow drinking in that thing?
|
|
#
?
Mar 30, 2014 21:45
|
|