Fresno going to offer full cost of attendance

This forum is for Football related topics only. Other topics will be moved to the appropriate forum.
VegasAggie71
Posts: 650
Joined: September 16th, 2013, 4:51 pm
Has liked: 0
Been liked: 0

Fresno going to offer full cost of attendance

Post by VegasAggie71 » February 26th, 2015, 2:58 pm

@FSAthletics: Fresno State to increase athletics aid for student-athletes, including the full cost of attendance. #EmpoweringExcellence

I saw another tweet that indicated that Fresno budget is projected to increase by $3MM to cover the cost.

Anyone know what USUs plans are? If we can't afford to cover the full cost of attendance and teams in our conference do, it will make recruiting much more difficult.



User avatar
Aglicious
Site Admin
Posts: 4866
Joined: January 14th, 2004, 12:00 am
Location: Vega$
Has liked: 50 times
Been liked: 100 times

Re: Fresno going to offer full cost of attendance

Post by Aglicious » February 26th, 2015, 3:16 pm

Barnes has stated numerous times that USU is prepared to offer the same. He has said it really is not an option to choose otherwise and he expects everyone in the MWC will do the same.



User avatar
hipsterdoofus21
Posts: 14845
Joined: November 3rd, 2010, 9:39 pm
Has liked: 78 times
Been liked: 214 times

Re: Fresno going to offer full cost of attendance

Post by hipsterdoofus21 » February 26th, 2015, 3:45 pm

Does that just mean less academic scholarships, or higher taxes for the rest of us?



aggies22
2018 Kick-off Pick'em Champion
Posts: 6281
Joined: November 3rd, 2010, 8:17 pm
Location: Smithfield, Utah
Has liked: 726 times
Been liked: 369 times
Contact:

Re: Fresno going to offer full cost of attendance

Post by aggies22 » February 26th, 2015, 4:06 pm

Aglicious wrote:Barnes has stated numerous times that USU is prepared to offer the same. He has said it really is not an option to choose otherwise and he expects everyone in the MWC will do the same.
This is exactly what I have heard as well. He has said he isn't sure where the money is going to come from, he just knows that we will have to offer the same kind of financial aid package in order to keep up with the other schools.



User avatar
bigbluebaby
Posts: 1504
Joined: November 3rd, 2010, 2:11 pm
Location: Logan, Idaho Falls, Rock Springs,
Has liked: 0
Been liked: 0

Re: Fresno going to offer full cost of attendance

Post by bigbluebaby » February 26th, 2015, 4:31 pm

I think our cost for this will be quite a bit less than Fresno.

I have heard the numbers from 1.5 to 2 million..


"So your saying I got a chance ??!!"

User avatar
3rdGenAggie
2016 Kickoff Pick'em Champion
Posts: 5082
Joined: November 3rd, 2010, 11:53 pm
Location: The City of the Salty Lake
Has liked: 6 times
Been liked: 5 times

Re: Fresno going to offer full cost of attendance

Post by 3rdGenAggie » February 26th, 2015, 4:51 pm

While I'm not very happy about this idea from a a USU viewpoint due to our already limited budget, it's frankly pretty ridiculous that University of Texas can make $50,000,000 from their athletic programs and hasn't already given $3,000,000 of that to the athletes to cover full cost of attendance. It does bother me in that it's one more step away from ameturism. The biggest travesty that will happen to college athletics will be when they go semi-pro and pay players (negotiate contracts, etc.)


"A long habit of not thinking a thing wrong, gives it a superficial appearance of being right."
-Thomas Paine


UtesAggs>BYU
Posts: 800
Joined: June 9th, 2013, 10:19 pm
Has liked: 0
Been liked: 0

Re: Fresno going to offer full cost of attendance

Post by UtesAggs>BYU » February 26th, 2015, 7:31 pm

bigbluebaby wrote:I think our cost for this will be quite a bit less than Fresno.

I have heard the numbers from 1.5 to 2 million..
Utah's cost of attendance will cost about $900k total. Utah sponsors 15 varsity sports, while USU sponsors 13. I would assume (no proof) that SLC is more expensive to live than Logan. So I think your number is a bit high.



ChicagoAggie
Posts: 1088
Joined: November 3rd, 2010, 7:13 am
Has liked: 0
Been liked: 11 times

Re: Fresno going to offer full cost of attendance

Post by ChicagoAggie » February 26th, 2015, 7:55 pm

UtesAggs>BYU wrote:
bigbluebaby wrote:I think our cost for this will be quite a bit less than Fresno.

I have heard the numbers from 1.5 to 2 million..
Utah's cost of attendance will cost about $900k total. Utah sponsors 15 varsity sports, while USU sponsors 13. I would assume (no proof) that SLC is more expensive to live than Logan. So I think your number is a bit high.
Doesn't cost of attendance also include travel expenses to go home during breaks? Surprised Utah's is that low


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk



NavyBlueAggie
Posts: 1558
Joined: November 5th, 2010, 9:28 am
Has liked: 29 times
Been liked: 11 times

Re: Fresno going to offer full cost of attendance

Post by NavyBlueAggie » February 26th, 2015, 9:43 pm

I see this as an arms race with no winners and no finish line. We are looking at fiscal irresponsibility of the first order, and I wonder when the casualties will begin to drop and people sober up regarding Football, especially? Unsustainable in so many ways.



frankiedoeshollywood
Posts: 582
Joined: March 7th, 2011, 2:18 pm
Has liked: 0
Been liked: 5 times

Re: Fresno going to offer full cost of attendance

Post by frankiedoeshollywood » February 27th, 2015, 8:39 am

NavyBlueAggie wrote:I see this as an arms race with no winners and no finish line. We are looking at fiscal irresponsibility of the first order, and I wonder when the casualties will begin to drop and people sober up regarding Football, especially? Unsustainable in so many ways.
Sooner rather than later and I believe the casualties could be catastrophic.

I do not believe college football in 2020 will remotely resemble college football today.

I actually think it could be a better product for a school like usu, but a lot of schools and fans will have to accept there are only about 20 schools that can actually afford to do this, and the rest of us need to just let them go their own way.



User avatar
nismo1616
Posts: 29
Joined: October 23rd, 2011, 9:11 am
Has liked: 0
Been liked: 0

Re: Fresno going to offer full cost of attendance

Post by nismo1616 » February 27th, 2015, 2:43 pm

I'm doing an internship up at the capital for the legislative session and Senator Hillyard tried getting us money for this this very thing. Problem is it picked up some negative media attention so it will most likely not happen. UofU did a similar thing a few years back but was able to keep it away from the media so they got it, from what I understand, they are still receiving over 2 million a year from the state in tax payer money. :wtf:

http://www.sltrib.com/home/2168618-155/ ... -athletics



NavyBlueAggie
Posts: 1558
Joined: November 5th, 2010, 9:28 am
Has liked: 29 times
Been liked: 11 times

Re: Fresno going to offer full cost of attendance

Post by NavyBlueAggie » February 27th, 2015, 7:10 pm

nismo1616 wrote:I'm doing an internship up at the capital for the legislative session and Senator Hillyard tried getting us money for this this very thing. Problem is it picked up some negative media attention so it will most likely not happen. UofU did a similar thing a few years back but was able to keep it away from the media so they got it, from what I understand, they are still receiving over 2 million a year from the state in tax payer money. :wtf:

http://www.sltrib.com/home/2168618-155/ ... -athletics

Concluding your report is spot on, it appears USU should get the support Senator Hillyard seeks plus other consideration due to the fact the Utes have been enjoying this external support for some time. If we don't get this funding we should publicly raise HELL because the U is getting a boost from the ultimate target, the taxpayer.



Blue Sage
Posts: 469
Joined: January 28th, 2015, 6:24 pm
Has liked: 7 times
Been liked: 9 times

Re: Fresno going to offer full cost of attendance

Post by Blue Sage » March 1st, 2015, 7:38 pm

Good to hear! This will push all MWC teams to step up. I have no idea if the P5 would ever expand to the P6 but If they did the MWC would be the next one in as long as they do things like this to keep up. Utah state got to the MWC just in time, for reference look at where the Vandals are at. If we don't do the north end zone bldg and GA doesn't come when he did who's to say the vandals didn't get In The MWC rather than us. I really hope to see a more solid push for wasatch front Aggies to support. Hey it's a drive but I do it. Utah sate has around 25k students a year we need to do a better job reaching out. A friend of mine in Portland is trying to set up a big blue chapter up there. If Utah state is to compete we need all hands on deck and chapters like this could go a long way. Most people that go to USU love the experience and would like to be involved. My guess is stuff like this has been said a million times before so I appologize if ideas like this are worn out on past threads. We could do a perpetual travel fund or house sharing to help Aggie fans come in from long distances. Rise up Aggie Nation!



trombone_ninja
Posts: 1031
Joined: November 24th, 2013, 1:59 pm
Location: Greeley, CO
Has liked: 5 times
Been liked: 57 times

Re: Fresno going to offer full cost of attendance

Post by trombone_ninja » March 1st, 2015, 10:48 pm

Am I the only one who's really upset that college athletics has come to this? Student athletes are already getting a free education (which is worth infinitely more than most people seem to think) and everyone wants to give them more? I really don't like the idea of all these athletes having the entirety of their college expenses handed to them on a silver platter spending their time in brand-new, fancy-shmancy state of the art facilities while most other students have to work two jobs and survive on ramen noodles just to pay for rent, tuition, and the exorbitant student fees that go toward funding athletics, all the while taking classes in old, run-down buildings with outdated equipment. One of my professors was complaining the other day about how lousy our classroom was and was telling us all about the marble floors and fancy leather chairs in the athletes' film room back at his last job at Texas Tech. Seriously?! Why is all this necessary? I don't know what it's going to take to end this stupid arms race, but it really needs to happen. Student athletes are no better than other students just because they can run faster and jump higher, and should not be treated so much better than anyone else.

Okay, rant over


USUFans’ resident band nerd
Providing useless “insider” info since 2013
Go Aggies!!!

User avatar
Gretsch
Posts: 1251
Joined: October 6th, 2011, 12:54 am
Location: Heber, Ut
Has liked: 2 times
Been liked: 8 times

Re: Fresno going to offer full cost of attendance

Post by Gretsch » March 1st, 2015, 11:07 pm

trombone_ninja wrote:Am I the only one who's really upset that college athletics has come to this? Student athletes are already getting a free education (which is worth infinitely more than most people seem to think) and everyone wants to give them more? I really don't like the idea of all these athletes having the entirety of their college expenses handed to them on a silver platter spending their time in brand-new, fancy-shmancy state of the art facilities while most other students have to work two jobs and survive on ramen noodles just to pay for rent, tuition, and the exorbitant student fees that go toward funding athletics, all the while taking classes in old, run-down buildings with outdated equipment. One of my professors was complaining the other day about how lousy our classroom was and was telling us all about the marble floors and fancy leather chairs in the athletes' film room back at his last job at Texas Tech. Seriously?! Why is all this necessary? I don't know what it's going to take to end this stupid arms race, but it really needs to happen. Student athletes are no better than other students just because they can run faster and jump higher, and should not be treated so much better than anyone else.

Okay, rant over

^^This.

If you want to know why a lot of students are turned off to supporting athletics across the country, look right here. While I want our athletes to have the best facilities and equipment available to them, there is a fine line where the athletes end up with better compensation than any other students many faculty members and when you cross that line you can very easily alienate many members of your school and community. How badly do you think athletic support would fall if we had a Shaw or Weichers' situation while that athlete was being not only compensated with free education, housing, and food but also receiving a paycheck that rivals most of the support staff working at athletic events?



LKGates
Posts: 3169
Joined: December 13th, 2010, 10:07 pm
Location: Salem, Oregon
Has liked: 63 times
Been liked: 118 times
Contact:

Re: Fresno going to offer full cost of attendance

Post by LKGates » March 1st, 2015, 11:50 pm

trombone_ninja wrote:Am I the only one who's really upset that college athletics has come to this? Student athletes are already getting a free education (which is worth infinitely more than most people seem to think) and everyone wants to give them more? I really don't like the idea of all these athletes having the entirety of their college expenses handed to them on a silver platter spending their time in brand-new, fancy-shmancy state of the art facilities while most other students have to work two jobs and survive on ramen noodles just to pay for rent, tuition, and the exorbitant student fees that go toward funding athletics, all the while taking classes in old, run-down buildings with outdated equipment. One of my professors was complaining the other day about how lousy our classroom was and was telling us all about the marble floors and fancy leather chairs in the athletes' film room back at his last job at Texas Tech. Seriously?! Why is all this necessary? I don't know what it's going to take to end this stupid arms race, but it really needs to happen. Student athletes are no better than other students just because they can run faster and jump higher, and should not be treated so much better than anyone else.

Okay, rant over
First, the institutions that are driving this (let's just say it, primarily the SEC, and to a lesser extent the PAC-12) don't really want to give the student-athletes more. They don't give a rat's backside about the student-athletes. If it were up to them, they'd treat the student-athletes like pitbulls in a dog fighting arena. What they really want is no competition. This isn't even about all the teams in the P5. This is about twenty or so universities that actually have a shot at a national championship. Do you think Ohio State, USC, Alabama, et al, are concerned about the welfare of Northwestern, Colorado, Vanderbilt, etc? The big dogs are saddled with those bottom feeders because of historical accidents, and if they had their way, the P5 little guys would go the same way as the G5, but they can't make that happen. The absolute LAST thing they want is some upstart, like Boise State, getting a whiff of the national championship. That's why the playoff will never go to 8 teams, because if it did, there would have to be a guaranteed G5 spot, and some no-name might just win the whole thing. And that would completely upset the whole paradigm.

So, yeah, the arms race will continue until the herd is properly thinned, and only Alabama, USC, OSU, LSU, FSU, Texas, Oklahoma, and about a dozen others are sitting with the lion's share of the money; basically an NFL minor league. Shoot, who knows, maybe each NFL franchise will end up "buying" the rights to the closest P5 sub-franchise; the Ohio State Buckeye-Bengals, the Florida State Seminole-Dolphins, the LSU Tiger-Saints.

I have no idea where this all ends. I know I don't like it. I also know that I love Utah State, and right now we are in a better spot than we have been for most of my 57 years. I also know that I have virtually no controll over all of this. So, I'll just make my donation to the BBSF and the MOF and enjoy the present.


Feel free to follow me on Twitter: @AggieLarry

NVAggie
Posts: 15003
Joined: November 3rd, 2010, 8:09 am
Location: Where the sagebrush grows!
Has liked: 209 times
Been liked: 190 times

Re: Fresno going to offer full cost of attendance

Post by NVAggie » March 2nd, 2015, 6:54 am

I can see why the students are upset, they are paying student fees so that these players can have more money. So we essentially ask these students to carry a bigger burden in on their own pocketbook or student loan debt all so some athletes can play ball. Sorry, this whole thing is insane and just tells me that sports are the last thing we seem to throw money at without thinking. We do it with our kids, we do it to go to games, and we do it to watch TV. I loved sports as a young man and now I am growing to hate them as an old man. It is a sad day.



swordsman1989
Posts: 930
Joined: December 26th, 2010, 8:43 am
Location: Copenhagen, Denmark
Has liked: 0
Been liked: 6 times

Re: Fresno going to offer full cost of attendance

Post by swordsman1989 » March 2nd, 2015, 7:40 am

trombone_ninja wrote:Am I the only one who's really upset that college athletics has come to this? Student athletes are already getting a free education (which is worth infinitely more than most people seem to think) and everyone wants to give them more? I really don't like the idea of all these athletes having the entirety of their college expenses handed to them on a silver platter spending their time in brand-new, fancy-shmancy state of the art facilities while most other students have to work two jobs and survive on ramen noodles just to pay for rent, tuition, and the exorbitant student fees that go toward funding athletics, all the while taking classes in old, run-down buildings with outdated equipment. One of my professors was complaining the other day about how lousy our classroom was and was telling us all about the marble floors and fancy leather chairs in the athletes' film room back at his last job at Texas Tech. Seriously?! Why is all this necessary? I don't know what it's going to take to end this stupid arms race, but it really needs to happen. Student athletes are no better than other students just because they can run faster and jump higher, and should not be treated so much better than anyone else.

Okay, rant over
Totally agree. I love supporting and cheering for the Aggies, but I am disgusted with what has happened to collegiate athletics in the past 25 years or so. It is getting harder and harder for me to feel good about college sports. There are only about 20 college athletic programs in the country that operate in the black, the rest require subsidies to operate and even with the subsidies many still operate in the red. To ask students and tax payers to fund the sports programs while higher education exponentially increases in cost and public funding for higher education drops is inexcusable. I think the end of the arms race will come when the majority of the universities say "enough!" and kick the top 20 or so universities out of the NCAA. Let Alabama, LSU, Texas, USC, Ohio State, Florida State and the others spin their football teams off into a professional NFL minor league and have the 95 other FBS programs adopt a new, cost conscious, revenue sharing, amateur model with a true playoff that gives equal opportunity to all 95 (+/- a few) teams regardless of conference.



User avatar
AndroidAggie
Posts: 3938
Joined: November 3rd, 2010, 7:47 am
Has liked: 8 times
Been liked: 39 times

Re: Fresno going to offer full cost of attendance

Post by AndroidAggie » March 2nd, 2015, 8:34 am

LKGates wrote:First, the institutions that are driving this (let's just say it, primarily the SEC, and to a lesser extent the PAC-12) don't really want to give the student-athletes more. They don't give a rat's backside about the student-athletes. If it were up to them, they'd treat the student-athletes like pitbulls in a dog fighting arena. What they really want is no competition. This isn't even about all the teams in the P5. This is about twenty or so universities that actually have a shot at a national championship. Do you think Ohio State, USC, Alabama, et al, are concerned about the welfare of Northwestern, Colorado, Vanderbilt, etc? The big dogs are saddled with those bottom feeders because of historical accidents, and if they had their way, the P5 little guys would go the same way as the G5, but they can't make that happen. The absolute LAST thing they want is some upstart, like Boise State, getting a whiff of the national championship. That's why the playoff will never go to 8 teams, because if it did, there would have to be a guaranteed G5 spot, and some no-name might just win the whole thing. And that would completely upset the whole paradigm.

So, yeah, the arms race will continue until the herd is properly thinned, and only Alabama, USC, OSU, LSU, FSU, Texas, Oklahoma, and about a dozen others are sitting with the lion's share of the money; basically an NFL minor league. Shoot, who knows, maybe each NFL franchise will end up "buying" the rights to the closest P5 sub-franchise; the Ohio State Buckeye-Bengals, the Florida State Seminole-Dolphins, the LSU Tiger-Saints.

I have no idea where this all ends. I know I don't like it. I also know that I love Utah State, and right now we are in a better spot than we have been for most of my 57 years. I also know that I have virtually no controll over all of this. So, I'll just make my donation to the BBSF and the MOF and enjoy the present.
This ought to be carved in granite and gifted to every single G5 school.

And maybe people should be forced to memorize it.

And even virgins to be sacri---

well, maybe just repeat it a few times.



VegasAggie71
Posts: 650
Joined: September 16th, 2013, 4:51 pm
Has liked: 0
Been liked: 0

Re: Fresno going to offer full cost of attendance

Post by VegasAggie71 » March 2nd, 2015, 11:31 am

Gretsch wrote:
trombone_ninja wrote:Am I the only one who's really upset that college athletics has come to this? Student athletes are already getting a free education (which is worth infinitely more than most people seem to think) and everyone wants to give them more? I really don't like the idea of all these athletes having the entirety of their college expenses handed to them on a silver platter spending their time in brand-new, fancy-shmancy state of the art facilities while most other students have to work two jobs and survive on ramen noodles just to pay for rent, tuition, and the exorbitant student fees that go toward funding athletics, all the while taking classes in old, run-down buildings with outdated equipment. One of my professors was complaining the other day about how lousy our classroom was and was telling us all about the marble floors and fancy leather chairs in the athletes' film room back at his last job at Texas Tech. Seriously?! Why is all this necessary? I don't know what it's going to take to end this stupid arms race, but it really needs to happen. Student athletes are no better than other students just because they can run faster and jump higher, and should not be treated so much better than anyone else.

Okay, rant over

^^This.

If you want to know why a lot of students are turned off to supporting athletics across the country, look right here. While I want our athletes to have the best facilities and equipment available to them, there is a fine line where the athletes end up with better compensation than any other students many faculty members and when you cross that line you can very easily alienate many members of your school and community. How badly do you think athletic support would fall if we had a Shaw or Weichers' situation while that athlete was being not only compensated with free education, housing, and food but also receiving a paycheck that rivals most of the support staff working at athletic events?
The football and mens basketball athletes are responsible for bringing in all the money, right? So why shouldn't they get a cut of it. I think they should be paid, but I think it should be tied to TV revenue rather than a burden on students through increased student fees.
Last edited by VegasAggie71 on March 2nd, 2015, 12:33 pm, edited 1 time in total.



User avatar
parkrob78
Posts: 359
Joined: February 19th, 2015, 1:29 pm
Location: Alpine, UT
Has liked: 0
Been liked: 0
Contact:

Re: Fresno going to offer full cost of attendance

Post by parkrob78 » March 2nd, 2015, 12:30 pm

As a former student athlete (non scholarship; prefered walk-on) trust me when I say the amount of work put into school for Student athletes as a whole is greater than a regular student. The "free' education is far from free it is more like an earned everyday education. I've seen it up close and personal both sides of this and, while I agree student athletes receive some amenities (i.e comfy chairs and a nice place to work out.) full cost of attendance is something that should have happened long ago.



tbadge
Posts: 419
Joined: May 21st, 2013, 2:03 pm
Has liked: 0
Been liked: 0

Re: Fresno going to offer full cost of attendance

Post by tbadge » March 2nd, 2015, 1:04 pm

The line between professional and amateur athletics is pretty well gone. I used to be a huge pro sports fan until I saw the players making an obscene amount of money. The rich owners would then try to sell everyone on the fact that the majority of a new stadium should be initially financed by the general public, majority of which will likely not go to the games, and how they're great for business. Don't know if anyone else has seen this article but apparently the 13 year old Houston Texans stadium is now outdated and they need more funding to get it up to Super Bowl standards: http://profootballtalk.nbcsports.com/20 ... r-bowl-li/

Now with college sports, particularly football and bball, bringing the lions share of the revenue into the coffers for a given school the players are expecting more. They do deserve a slice of the pie since it's their health on the line but it's just difficult to accept if you're a student and you're watching your infrastructure crumble around you knowing that little to no slice of the pie is likely making it onto campus. Who knows if this will ever change but I wouldn't anticipate it changing.

I think LK is probably right in that there eventually will be a thinning of the crowd. It's entirely possible that within the next 10-20 years a lot of schools will be forced out of competing at the D1 level. I don't think this is a good thing, especially for the P5 schools, and tv revenue parity for all schools may come to the forefront as a large issue. For example, CBS and Time Warner pays $770 million a year for broadcasting rights for the NCAA BBall tourney. The tournament pays out about $194 million of the $770 million it took in. http://www.forbes.com/sites/chrissmith/ ... 6-million/

There's a lot of information that I'm likely missing and don't claim to have on broadcasting rights, how much is paid to the venues (if any), etc. for the NCAAT. The big problem, as I see it, is that the NCAA pretends to have the student athletes interest at heart but they don't. The larger schools are trying to do something about it but unfortunately they're the ones with all the money. Now the smaller schools, who can't afford it, are having to deal with the ramifications of the changes the bigger schools make.

Unless there is a concept of revenue parity in the NCAA, similar to the NFL, than it's just a matter of time before many schools just get out of trying to have athletic teams.



User avatar
3rdGenAggie
2016 Kickoff Pick'em Champion
Posts: 5082
Joined: November 3rd, 2010, 11:53 pm
Location: The City of the Salty Lake
Has liked: 6 times
Been liked: 5 times

Re: Fresno going to offer full cost of attendance

Post by 3rdGenAggie » March 2nd, 2015, 1:09 pm

parkrob78 wrote:As a former student athlete (non scholarship; prefered walk-on) trust me when I say the amount of work put into school for Student athletes as a whole is greater than a regular student. The "free' education is far from free it is more like an earned everyday education. I've seen it up close and personal both sides of this and, while I agree student athletes receive some amenities (i.e comfy chairs and a nice place to work out.) full cost of attendance is something that should have happened long ago.
Do you agree with other students paying an athletics fee so that athletes can have these amenities? That's the biggest issue to me. While a student athlete will say "woe is me, I work so hard and deserve it" (which they probably do), the average student gets no help, regardless of how hard they work and actually help subsidize the athletes.


"A long habit of not thinking a thing wrong, gives it a superficial appearance of being right."
-Thomas Paine


LKGates
Posts: 3169
Joined: December 13th, 2010, 10:07 pm
Location: Salem, Oregon
Has liked: 63 times
Been liked: 118 times
Contact:

Re: Fresno going to offer full cost of attendance

Post by LKGates » March 2nd, 2015, 1:57 pm

You want to see REAL student-athletes, go look at the club sports. Hockey has been at the national club hockey tournament multiple times in the last 5-6 years. Baseball has two national championships in the last 3 years. No only do those guys not get scholarships, but they have to pay to play. In the case of hockey, the participation fee is about $1500 per year. Then they have to pay for their own travel. They don't get excused absences from classes. They have the right to have the university logo on the uniforms they buy themselves. That's about it. And those guys work their tails off.


Feel free to follow me on Twitter: @AggieLarry

User avatar
Gretsch
Posts: 1251
Joined: October 6th, 2011, 12:54 am
Location: Heber, Ut
Has liked: 2 times
Been liked: 8 times

Re: Fresno going to offer full cost of attendance

Post by Gretsch » March 2nd, 2015, 7:42 pm

VegasAggie71 wrote:
Gretsch wrote:
trombone_ninja wrote:Am I the only one who's really upset that college athletics has come to this? Student athletes are already getting a free education (which is worth infinitely more than most people seem to think) and everyone wants to give them more? I really don't like the idea of all these athletes having the entirety of their college expenses handed to them on a silver platter spending their time in brand-new, fancy-shmancy state of the art facilities while most other students have to work two jobs and survive on ramen noodles just to pay for rent, tuition, and the exorbitant student fees that go toward funding athletics, all the while taking classes in old, run-down buildings with outdated equipment. One of my professors was complaining the other day about how lousy our classroom was and was telling us all about the marble floors and fancy leather chairs in the athletes' film room back at his last job at Texas Tech. Seriously?! Why is all this necessary? I don't know what it's going to take to end this stupid arms race, but it really needs to happen. Student athletes are no better than other students just because they can run faster and jump higher, and should not be treated so much better than anyone else.

Okay, rant over

^^This.

If you want to know why a lot of students are turned off to supporting athletics across the country, look right here. While I want our athletes to have the best facilities and equipment available to them, there is a fine line where the athletes end up with better compensation than any other students many faculty members and when you cross that line you can very easily alienate many members of your school and community. How badly do you think athletic support would fall if we had a Shaw or Weichers' situation while that athlete was being not only compensated with free education, housing, and food but also receiving a paycheck that rivals most of the support staff working at athletic events?
The football and mens basketball athletes are responsible for bringing in all the money, right? So why shouldn't they get a cut of it. I think they should be paid, but I think it should be tied to TV revenue rather than a burden on students through increased student fees.
I may have mentioned it here before, but I feel student athletes should get a percentage of TV and merchandise revenue that becomes available to them when they earn their degree with in 3 years of finishing their eligibility. If they don't earn their degree the funds are donated to the first institution the attended as a non athletic scholarship.



swordsman1989
Posts: 930
Joined: December 26th, 2010, 8:43 am
Location: Copenhagen, Denmark
Has liked: 0
Been liked: 6 times

Re: Fresno going to offer full cost of attendance

Post by swordsman1989 » March 3rd, 2015, 1:19 am

VegasAggie71 wrote:
Gretsch wrote:
trombone_ninja wrote:Am I the only one who's really upset that college athletics has come to this? Student athletes are already getting a free education (which is worth infinitely more than most people seem to think) and everyone wants to give them more? I really don't like the idea of all these athletes having the entirety of their college expenses handed to them on a silver platter spending their time in brand-new, fancy-shmancy state of the art facilities while most other students have to work two jobs and survive on ramen noodles just to pay for rent, tuition, and the exorbitant student fees that go toward funding athletics, all the while taking classes in old, run-down buildings with outdated equipment. One of my professors was complaining the other day about how lousy our classroom was and was telling us all about the marble floors and fancy leather chairs in the athletes' film room back at his last job at Texas Tech. Seriously?! Why is all this necessary? I don't know what it's going to take to end this stupid arms race, but it really needs to happen. Student athletes are no better than other students just because they can run faster and jump higher, and should not be treated so much better than anyone else.

Okay, rant over

^^This.

If you want to know why a lot of students are turned off to supporting athletics across the country, look right here. While I want our athletes to have the best facilities and equipment available to them, there is a fine line where the athletes end up with better compensation than any other students many faculty members and when you cross that line you can very easily alienate many members of your school and community. How badly do you think athletic support would fall if we had a Shaw or Weichers' situation while that athlete was being not only compensated with free education, housing, and food but also receiving a paycheck that rivals most of the support staff working at athletic events?
The football and mens basketball athletes are responsible for bringing in all the money, right? So why shouldn't they get a cut of it. I think they should be paid, but I think it should be tied to TV revenue rather than a burden on students through increased student fees.
Title IX. USU is not a sports business, it is a public, non-profit, institution of higher education which receives a generous amount of federal funding. You cannot give male athletes in football and basketball perks (payments) that the female athletes in tennis and gymnastics do not get without risking USUs federal funding. The question many division 1 Universities need to ask is do they want to be public institutions of higher education that happen to sponsor athletics programs, or do they want to be professional sports franchises that happen to do some teaching on the side.



User avatar
Gretsch
Posts: 1251
Joined: October 6th, 2011, 12:54 am
Location: Heber, Ut
Has liked: 2 times
Been liked: 8 times

Re: Fresno going to offer full cost of attendance

Post by Gretsch » March 3rd, 2015, 7:54 am

swordsman1989 wrote:
VegasAggie71 wrote:
Gretsch wrote:
trombone_ninja wrote:Am I the only one who's really upset that college athletics has come to this? Student athletes are already getting a free education (which is worth infinitely more than most people seem to think) and everyone wants to give them more? I really don't like the idea of all these athletes having the entirety of their college expenses handed to them on a silver platter spending their time in brand-new, fancy-shmancy state of the art facilities while most other students have to work two jobs and survive on ramen noodles just to pay for rent, tuition, and the exorbitant student fees that go toward funding athletics, all the while taking classes in old, run-down buildings with outdated equipment. One of my professors was complaining the other day about how lousy our classroom was and was telling us all about the marble floors and fancy leather chairs in the athletes' film room back at his last job at Texas Tech. Seriously?! Why is all this necessary? I don't know what it's going to take to end this stupid arms race, but it really needs to happen. Student athletes are no better than other students just because they can run faster and jump higher, and should not be treated so much better than anyone else.

Okay, rant over

^^This.

If you want to know why a lot of students are turned off to supporting athletics across the country, look right here. While I want our athletes to have the best facilities and equipment available to them, there is a fine line where the athletes end up with better compensation than any other students many faculty members and when you cross that line you can very easily alienate many members of your school and community. How badly do you think athletic support would fall if we had a Shaw or Weichers' situation while that athlete was being not only compensated with free education, housing, and food but also receiving a paycheck that rivals most of the support staff working at athletic events?
The football and mens basketball athletes are responsible for bringing in all the money, right? So why shouldn't they get a cut of it. I think they should be paid, but I think it should be tied to TV revenue rather than a burden on students through increased student fees.
Title IX. USU is not a sports business, it is a public, non-profit, institution of higher education which receives a generous amount of federal funding. You cannot give male athletes in football and basketball perks (payments) that the female athletes in tennis and gymnastics do not get without risking USUs federal funding. The question many division 1 Universities need to ask is do they want to be public institutions of higher education that happen to sponsor athletics programs, or do they want to be professional sports franchises that happen to do some teaching on the side.
I absolutely agree. But, if the NCAA is going to allow "full cost" then I would be more OK if all d1 athletes get a percentage cut from their school, conference, and NCAA merchandising and TV contracts. Allow them to receive it only after graduating with in 3 years of eligibility and if they don't graduate it goes to their school as an academic scholarship for not athletes.



User avatar
parkrob78
Posts: 359
Joined: February 19th, 2015, 1:29 pm
Location: Alpine, UT
Has liked: 0
Been liked: 0
Contact:

Re: Fresno going to offer full cost of attendance

Post by parkrob78 » March 3rd, 2015, 9:14 am

3rdGenAggie wrote:
parkrob78 wrote:As a former student athlete (non scholarship; prefered walk-on) trust me when I say the amount of work put into school for Student athletes as a whole is greater than a regular student. The "free' education is far from free it is more like an earned everyday education. I've seen it up close and personal both sides of this and, while I agree student athletes receive some amenities (i.e comfy chairs and a nice place to work out.) full cost of attendance is something that should have happened long ago.
Do you agree with other students paying an athletics fee so that athletes can have these amenities? That's the biggest issue to me. While a student athlete will say "woe is me, I work so hard and deserve it" (which they probably do), the average student gets no help, regardless of how hard they work and actually help subsidize the athletes.
these "athletic fees" don't buy a comfy chair for the athletes to watch film in or towards the meager stipend athletes receive. They go toward many different things included but not limited to: Keeping student tickets to games free (probably the biggest one), funding intramural sports for everyone on campus, maintaining intramural fields and the field house, help funding smaller sports and club teams. its not all as cut and dry as you and others are trying to make it sound. regular students have every opportunity for help. there are grants and scholarships that can be earned and applied for to help them out (i know is wasn't under scholarship). Also a regular student that "has to get a job" actually has the time to get a job. I was on the field or in the classroom for about 12 hours a day (6-6) there is no time to earn extra money there. I'm not saying athletes should be paid just saying full cost of attendance is overdue.



User avatar
TheAKAggie
Posts: 5234
Joined: February 3rd, 2012, 10:21 pm
Location: Hyde Park, UT
Has liked: 29 times
Been liked: 61 times
Contact:

Re: Fresno going to offer full cost of attendance

Post by TheAKAggie » March 3rd, 2015, 9:37 am

LKGates wrote:You want to see REAL student-athletes, go look at the club sports. Hockey has been at the national club hockey tournament multiple times in the last 5-6 years. Baseball has two national championships in the last 3 years. No only do those guys not get scholarships, but they have to pay to play. In the case of hockey, the participation fee is about $1500 per year. Then they have to pay for their own travel. They don't get excused absences from classes. They have the right to have the university logo on the uniforms they buy themselves. That's about it. And those guys work their tails off.
It was all for the chicks, LK!


Hail Aggies!

User avatar
3rdGenAggie
2016 Kickoff Pick'em Champion
Posts: 5082
Joined: November 3rd, 2010, 11:53 pm
Location: The City of the Salty Lake
Has liked: 6 times
Been liked: 5 times

Re: Fresno going to offer full cost of attendance

Post by 3rdGenAggie » March 3rd, 2015, 10:25 am

parkrob78 wrote:
3rdGenAggie wrote:
parkrob78 wrote:As a former student athlete (non scholarship; prefered walk-on) trust me when I say the amount of work put into school for Student athletes as a whole is greater than a regular student. The "free' education is far from free it is more like an earned everyday education. I've seen it up close and personal both sides of this and, while I agree student athletes receive some amenities (i.e comfy chairs and a nice place to work out.) full cost of attendance is something that should have happened long ago.
Do you agree with other students paying an athletics fee so that athletes can have these amenities? That's the biggest issue to me. While a student athlete will say "woe is me, I work so hard and deserve it" (which they probably do), the average student gets no help, regardless of how hard they work and actually help subsidize the athletes.
these "athletic fees" don't buy a comfy chair for the athletes to watch film in or towards the meager stipend athletes receive. They go toward many different things included but not limited to: Keeping student tickets to games free (probably the biggest one), funding intramural sports for everyone on campus, maintaining intramural fields and the field house, help funding smaller sports and club teams. its not all as cut and dry as you and others are trying to make it sound. regular students have every opportunity for help. there are grants and scholarships that can be earned and applied for to help them out (i know is wasn't under scholarship). Also a regular student that "has to get a job" actually has the time to get a job. I was on the field or in the classroom for about 12 hours a day (6-6) there is no time to earn extra money there. I'm not saying athletes should be paid just saying full cost of attendance is overdue.
If that's they case (and I have no reason to disbelieve you), they should call it an Activities Fee instead of an Athletics Fee if the money doesn't actually go towards athletics. They would get less kickback.


"A long habit of not thinking a thing wrong, gives it a superficial appearance of being right."
-Thomas Paine


User avatar
Aglicious
Site Admin
Posts: 4866
Joined: January 14th, 2004, 12:00 am
Location: Vega$
Has liked: 50 times
Been liked: 100 times

Re: Fresno going to offer full cost of attendance

Post by Aglicious » March 3rd, 2015, 12:21 pm

3rdGenAggie wrote:
parkrob78 wrote:
3rdGenAggie wrote:
parkrob78 wrote:As a former student athlete (non scholarship; prefered walk-on) trust me when I say the amount of work put into school for Student athletes as a whole is greater than a regular student. The "free' education is far from free it is more like an earned everyday education. I've seen it up close and personal both sides of this and, while I agree student athletes receive some amenities (i.e comfy chairs and a nice place to work out.) full cost of attendance is something that should have happened long ago.
Do you agree with other students paying an athletics fee so that athletes can have these amenities? That's the biggest issue to me. While a student athlete will say "woe is me, I work so hard and deserve it" (which they probably do), the average student gets no help, regardless of how hard they work and actually help subsidize the athletes.
these "athletic fees" don't buy a comfy chair for the athletes to watch film in or towards the meager stipend athletes receive. They go toward many different things included but not limited to: Keeping student tickets to games free (probably the biggest one), funding intramural sports for everyone on campus, maintaining intramural fields and the field house, help funding smaller sports and club teams. its not all as cut and dry as you and others are trying to make it sound. regular students have every opportunity for help. there are grants and scholarships that can be earned and applied for to help them out (i know is wasn't under scholarship). Also a regular student that "has to get a job" actually has the time to get a job. I was on the field or in the classroom for about 12 hours a day (6-6) there is no time to earn extra money there. I'm not saying athletes should be paid just saying full cost of attendance is overdue.
If that's they case (and I have no reason to disbelieve you), they should call it an Activities Fee instead of an Athletics Fee if the money doesn't actually go towards athletics. They would get less kickback.
I was going to suggest the same thing, I think it is a matter of semantics. The fact that this fee gets separated from tuition fees makes it appear or feel like it is something "extra" or "beyond" what is necessary. I have a feeling we would see the same backlash for other things if tuition was broken down line item by line item. I personally have no issue with the athletics fee, especially since a vote to increase it was left up to the students on two separate occasions and was passed both times. With today's students however I have my doubts about whether or not that vote would pass.

Trombone ninja's comments above are some of the most telling I have read on here about the state of mind and reasoning behind the lack of support and interest in sports by this generation's students. That way of thinking is so foreign to me that I don't relate. It sounds like it is viewed as an us versus them scenario. I was the student that worked multiple jobs to get by and never enjoyed the nicest housing or lifestyle but I also had the opportunity to live with several athletes over my time in Logan and I saw how hard they worked too. I can tell you that even with a full load of credits and multiple jobs on my plate that I still had more free time than they did.

All that aside, I would have paid or voted to pay for any student fee related to athletics because I personally gained from that as well. Attending games provided me entertainment and some of the best memories I have of college. I can also tell you that having worked for the University in different capacities during my time as a student and becoming familiar with various facilities that the entire campus has received so many upgrades over the past 25 years that it is nearly not recognizable. On-campus housing options look like luxury suites compared to what they used to be. The classroom building and library upgrades are numerous and many are state-of-the-art. I know not every building is ideal or new but my point is that the general student body is enjoying just as many facility upgrades as the athletes are, and probably more.

I do agree that there is a line where facilities can become something too extravagant and opulence exceeds function. However, I don't think we are anywhere near that danger line at USU. We have a Spectrum that basically looks like the day it was built minus a few minor facelift items and some upgrades due to technology. The NEZ complex and Strength & Conditioning Building are nice additions to Romney but again, other that these and a few field changes and minor facelifts at the south end, the bones of Romney stand exactly how they did the day it was built. By comparison, look at facilities like the new business building. Some could argue that it is too fancy but to those in the business department it reflects the type of professional environment that is desired. Should not the same apply to our sports facilities?



User avatar
parkrob78
Posts: 359
Joined: February 19th, 2015, 1:29 pm
Location: Alpine, UT
Has liked: 0
Been liked: 0
Contact:

Re: Fresno going to offer full cost of attendance

Post by parkrob78 » March 3rd, 2015, 12:34 pm

Everything he said^^^^ :thumbsup: :utah: :state:



User avatar
aggieguy13
Posts: 848
Joined: December 1st, 2010, 7:51 pm
Has liked: 0
Been liked: 4 times

Re: Fresno going to offer full cost of attendance

Post by aggieguy13 » March 3rd, 2015, 7:52 pm

Aglicious wrote:
3rdGenAggie wrote:
parkrob78 wrote:
3rdGenAggie wrote:
parkrob78 wrote:As a former student athlete (non scholarship; prefered walk-on) trust me when I say the amount of work put into school for Student athletes as a whole is greater than a regular student. The "free' education is far from free it is more like an earned everyday education. I've seen it up close and personal both sides of this and, while I agree student athletes receive some amenities (i.e comfy chairs and a nice place to work out.) full cost of attendance is something that should have happened long ago.
Do you agree with other students paying an athletics fee so that athletes can have these amenities? That's the biggest issue to me. While a student athlete will say "woe is me, I work so hard and deserve it" (which they probably do), the average student gets no help, regardless of how hard they work and actually help subsidize the athletes.
these "athletic fees" don't buy a comfy chair for the athletes to watch film in or towards the meager stipend athletes receive. They go toward many different things included but not limited to: Keeping student tickets to games free (probably the biggest one), funding intramural sports for everyone on campus, maintaining intramural fields and the field house, help funding smaller sports and club teams. its not all as cut and dry as you and others are trying to make it sound. regular students have every opportunity for help. there are grants and scholarships that can be earned and applied for to help them out (i know is wasn't under scholarship). Also a regular student that "has to get a job" actually has the time to get a job. I was on the field or in the classroom for about 12 hours a day (6-6) there is no time to earn extra money there. I'm not saying athletes should be paid just saying full cost of attendance is overdue.
If that's they case (and I have no reason to disbelieve you), they should call it an Activities Fee instead of an Athletics Fee if the money doesn't actually go towards athletics. They would get less kickback.
I was going to suggest the same thing, I think it is a matter of semantics. The fact that this fee gets separated from tuition fees makes it appear or feel like it is something "extra" or "beyond" what is necessary. I have a feeling we would see the same backlash for other things if tuition was broken down line item by line item. I personally have no issue with the athletics fee, especially since a vote to increase it was left up to the students on two separate occasions and was passed both times. With today's students however I have my doubts about whether or not that vote would pass.

Trombone ninja's comments above are some of the most telling I have read on here about the state of mind and reasoning behind the lack of support and interest in sports by this generation's students. That way of thinking is so foreign to me that I don't relate. It sounds like it is viewed as an us versus them scenario. I was the student that worked multiple jobs to get by and never enjoyed the nicest housing or lifestyle but I also had the opportunity to live with several athletes over my time in Logan and I saw how hard they worked too. I can tell you that even with a full load of credits and multiple jobs on my plate that I still had more free time than they did.

All that aside, I would have paid or voted to pay for any student fee related to athletics because I personally gained from that as well. Attending games provided me entertainment and some of the best memories I have of college. I can also tell you that having worked for the University in different capacities during my time as a student and becoming familiar with various facilities that the entire campus has received so many upgrades over the past 25 years that it is nearly not recognizable. On-campus housing options look like luxury suites compared to what they used to be. The classroom building and library upgrades are numerous and many are state-of-the-art. I know not every building is ideal or new but my point is that the general student body is enjoying just as many facility upgrades as the athletes are, and probably more.

I do agree that there is a line where facilities can become something too extravagant and opulence exceeds function. However, I don't think we are anywhere near that danger line at USU. We have a Spectrum that basically looks like the day it was built minus a few minor facelift items and some upgrades due to technology. The NEZ complex and Strength & Conditioning Building are nice additions to Romney but again, other that these and a few field changes and minor facelifts at the south end, the bones of Romney stand exactly how they did the day it was built. By comparison, look at facilities like the new business building. Some could argue that it is too fancy but to those in the business department it reflects the type of professional environment that is desired. Should not the same apply to our sports facilities?
100% agree. I don't think the average student has any idea how hard many student-athletes have to work to excel on the field and keep up in the classroom.



NVAggie
Posts: 15003
Joined: November 3rd, 2010, 8:09 am
Location: Where the sagebrush grows!
Has liked: 209 times
Been liked: 190 times

Re: Fresno going to offer full cost of attendance

Post by NVAggie » March 3rd, 2015, 8:16 pm

I'm sorry, but I don't think we need to cry for these athletes.



BobWilson
Posts: 745
Joined: November 3rd, 2010, 6:03 pm
Has liked: 0
Been liked: 6 times

Re: Fresno going to offer full cost of attendance

Post by BobWilson » March 9th, 2015, 10:55 pm

Intercollegiate athletics will continue to be an arms race , which USU and like schools will always end up sucking hind teat, until athletic scholarships (sic) are abolished- students pick their colleges for educational purposes, compete with all students for academic scholarships, and turn out for sports if they choose to do so. FB coaching staffs will be reduced to 6 and basketball staffs to 2. A high percentage of students will participate in intramurals and intercollegiate athletics - most schools will have about 20 men's and women's teams. The NCAA rule book will be reduced to about 25 pages - no more problems with Title IX. recruiting violations, or eligibility - if a student is admitted, she/he is eligible and would be immediately eligible upon transferring to another school.

Professional FB and BB teams would sponsor "minor league" teams to replace universities (sic) who now serve that role.



Locked Previous topicNext topic