|
Trin Tragula posted:Re: where's the money going to come from? Assuming that you're going to do nothing more than pay 85 scholarship kids a $20k per year stipend, you need to find $1.7 million a year. Multiply that by 14 teams, you've got about $23 million. Yeah, the source of money is readily available, but there is no way you're getting a whole football team for just $20,000 per person per year. A large Division I university will have somewhere in the neighborhood of 600 student-athletes, male and female, across all sports. At an average wage scale of $30,000 a year (what the hell, I'm being generous), that's $18 million. That's about 75 percent of the entire operating budget for a mid-level FBS university. Title IX adds a special issue: Because the football team applicants are overwhelmingly male, per job requirements, the athletic departments may have to agree to have wages for male and female athletes line up. Either by averages, median dollars, total salary -- whatever it is, it's going to have a huge effect on women's sports because the colleges won't get away from paying the starting softball catcher $2,000 a year while giving the third-string cornerback $20,000 a year. At least, they won't without significant legislative turmoil and (likely) a court ruling. A highly touted football recruit will attract salaries of $250,000 per year in an open market, perhaps up to $1 million. Players who leave via "free agency" could easily make $1 million, and possibly more. Obviously, conferences will implement cost-control measures such as salary caps and performance expectation clauses and deny me of my fantasy of seeing Alabamans bankrupt their state to support winning football teams.
|
#
¿
Jan 29, 2014 12:13
|
|
|
|
| # ¿ May 13, 2024 21:57 |
|
|
Femur posted:Looking at news about tv contracts, coaches salaries, those bowl CEO's salaries, it's impossible not to think CFB makes a ton of money, and what the school does with all that money is really unknown. Embezzling it through building projects seems pretty popular. At all but about 30 or 40 institutions across the country, that money is all spent. This would add the largest line item on the whole AD expense sheet, but that's not necessarily a bad thing. What really needs to happen, however, is the de-coupling of college athletics from a state-supported model to a completely private model.
|
|
#
¿
Jan 29, 2014 21:28
|
|
|
College athletes work at least 40 hours a week out of season at their sport of choice and 60 hours a week in-season, if not more. Those numbers might be inflated some if you count mandatory "tutoring" sessions as work, which I would because athletes are supposed to attend.
|
|
#
¿
Jan 29, 2014 21:56
|
|
|
swickles posted:Rick Perry would rather die than work for UT. Rick Perry would do for UT what he wanted to do to the federal government: Strip it down to a skeleton and sell off the pieces to his friends at deep discounts.
|
|
#
¿
Jan 29, 2014 23:25
|
|
|
You don't have to make it illegal, you just have to strip away the funding mechanism and go to an all-club model. The problem is that the two most popular sports -- football and men's basketball -- rely on the NCAA for talent development and every college president in the nation is more than willing to provide this at a detriment to their schools.
|
|
#
¿
Feb 2, 2014 23:05
|
|
|
Maybe 10 percent of athletes at FBS schools are capable of handling both their studies and their sport's workload. The other 90 percent are either one step behind or in need of redemial studies that should be taught at a middle-school level.
|
|
#
¿
Feb 6, 2014 00:21
|
|
|
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
|
|
|
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
|
|
|
Kalit posted:Are you just making up numbers? It's an educated guess. I've seen a few different upkeep numbers for stadiums, practice facilities et. al. And I like to estimate toward the high side because it's safer to. Kalit posted: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. The ideal is that private funds pay for everything ... in practice, it has been tricky. I've read articles about schools literally rigging student elections to approve an increase in student fees for the purpose of building gyms and other amenities. Building is good; building in spite of the wishes of those who will eventually pay for it is not.
|
|
#
¿
Mar 31, 2014 01:22
|
|
|
|
| # ¿ May 13, 2024 21:57 |
|
|
The ironic thing is, student-athletes at the University of Tennessee and 98 percent of other colleges all get bigger dorm rooms, better food, and classes scheduled around the athletic requirements. The practice thing is a bitch, though.
|
|
#
¿
Apr 3, 2014 08:54
|
|