PDA

View Full Version : Full Cost of Attendance Scholarships



Pages : [1] 2

EastFan1
02-17-2015, 11:36 AM
I have seen a couple articles about hockey programs planning to provide "full cost of attendance" scholarships next year, which can be add another $4,000 or more per year in addition to a full scholarship.

Are any women's programs offering this extra money to players next year? I would think that an extra $16,000 plus in cash over four years might be a difference maker.

TonyTheTiger20
02-17-2015, 11:40 AM
I have seen a couple articles about hockey programs planning to provide "full cost of attendance" scholarships next year, which can be add another $4,000 or more per year in addition to a full scholarship.

Are any women's programs offering this extra money to players next year? I would think that an extra $16,000 plus in cash over four years might be a difference maker.
If any are going to, I imagine Boston College and the Big Ten teams would be first as power conference members.

EastFan1
02-17-2015, 12:20 PM
If any are going to, I imagine Boston College and the Big Ten teams would be first as power conference members.

I doubt it. BC was the lone "no" vote in the power 5 conferences against FCOA scholarships. Also, I didn't think BC provides the maximum 18 scholarships for women's hockey at this time?

http://bcheights.com/news/2015/bc-athletics-votes-alone-dissent-full-cost-attendance-scholarship-measure/

The references I have seen to providing FCOA scholarships for hockey have not come from Big Ten schools.

TonyTheTiger20
02-17-2015, 01:58 PM
I doubt it. BC was the lone "no" vote in the power 5 conferences against FCOA scholarships. Also, I didn't think BC provides the maximum 18 scholarships for women's hockey at this time?

http://bcheights.com/news/2015/bc-athletics-votes-alone-dissent-full-cost-attendance-scholarship-measure/

The references I have seen to providing FCOA scholarships for hockey have not come from Big Ten schools.
BC absolutely gives the full compliment of women's hockey scholarships. And yes, BC was the lone no vote of the power 5 conferences but as an ACC member school should the ACC (as a power conference) opt to give full cost of attendance BC would be obligated to as well. The no vote was a ceremonial one. It doesn't mean BC won't give FCOA scholarships should that become an option. Even if they weren't obligated to they would still do it because otherwise it's effectively ending any hope you had of competing for recruits.

Other conferences could opt to do so in hockey as well, I'm not saying they won't, but what I'm saying is that if any of them do, the B1G schools + BC would absolutely be in that group because of their power 5 conference membership.

vicb
02-17-2015, 03:00 PM
I wonder if the Div III playup schools (Clarkson, SLU, RPI, Colorado College etc) can offer the extra money?? Gonna really kill them recruiting wise if they cannot or decide not to.

pokechecker
02-17-2015, 03:19 PM
I wonder if the Div III playup schools (Clarkson, SLU, RPI, Colorado College etc) can offer the extra money?? Gonna really kill them recruiting wise if they cannot or decide not to.

if the D2 & D3 schools have to pay the women's coach the same as the men's, and fund both teams the same
it might be over for them anyway

it will certainly be tough for any new teams to take up women's hockey

Eeyore
02-17-2015, 08:25 PM
Minnesota announced a couple of months ago that it will be implementing full cost of attendance scholarships for all men's and women's athletic programs. Some other Big 10 schools have announced the same but I don't know if Wisconsin, Ohio State, or Penn State are among them.

rangersrule
02-18-2015, 08:58 AM
Forgive me if this sounds ignorant but, what does "full cost of attendance" mean? If a kid is getting full ride or a 75% - 80% scholarship already how is it impacted?
Minnesota announced a couple of months ago that it will be implementing full cost of attendance scholarships for all men's and women's athletic programs. Some other Big 10 schools have announced the same but I don't know if Wisconsin, Ohio State, or Penn State are among them.

KTDC
02-18-2015, 10:23 AM
Minnesota announced a couple of months ago that it will be implementing full cost of attendance scholarships for all men's and women's athletic programs. Some other Big 10 schools have announced the same but I don't know if Wisconsin, Ohio State, or Penn State are among them.


Forgive me if this sounds ignorant but, what does "full cost of attendance" mean? If a kid is getting full ride or a 75% - 80% scholarship already how is it impacted?

Also, can somebody take a shot at explaining how this is not going to be 'all bad and no good' because of competitive imbalance issues and raising the cost of women's hockey?

EastFan1
02-18-2015, 11:00 AM
http://www.usatoday.com/story/sports/ncaaf/recruiting/2015/02/03/new-benefits-autonomy-james-franklin-mike-macintyre-hugh-freeze/22808431/

Sorry, but competitive imbalance already exists in women's hockey and the cost of all Division 1 sports is going up no matter what.

If you are a fan of parity, hope that some other programs step up and lure away some national team players with more money and benefits.

pokechecker
02-18-2015, 11:45 AM
Sorry, but competitive imbalance already exists in women's hockey and the cost of all Division 1 sports is going up no matter what.



there is an imbalance, but it is not on school size, "cost of attendance" will certainly make it tough for the D2 & D3 schools to be competitive

seems to me a better route for the NCAA to have taken would be to offer degrees in sports, make sports similar to the other departments, but I guess they are just being honest, it's all about the money

favorite quotes:
"And though practically everyone in college athletics recognizes that the scholarship was not sufficient and a stipend was long overdue (actually some schools have been paying .... under the table)

Each college's financial aid office is required under Federal guidelines to publish a full cost of attendance number, which includes an estimate of incidental expenses. Exactly what is included in that number, however, can vary from school to school and even from person to person depending on factors like distance from home or whether they have a child.

for instance, said the average full cost of attendance benefit for Auburn athletes is likely in the neighborhood of $6,000 per year, with an additional $1,500 if they enroll in summer school."

this is great, so now it's not only the government that will be in the business of paying young women to have kids out of wedlock, colleges will be paying the young men as well.

D2D
02-18-2015, 12:11 PM
Related thread here: http://board.uscho.com/showthread.php?111101-Will-Power-5-changes-kill-college-hockey-s-parity&highlight=

KTDC
02-18-2015, 12:22 PM
Related thread here: http://board.uscho.com/showthread.php?111101-Will-Power-5-changes-kill-college-hockey-s-parity&highlight=

Critical Thinker on the other thread says:
If the B1G did get to play by different rules to attract better players, and then won more games, wouldn't that give more parity to college hockey?

hahahaha

pokechecker
02-18-2015, 01:12 PM
Critical Thinker on the other thread says:
If the B1G did get to play by different rules to attract better players, and then won more games, wouldn't that give more parity to college hockey?

hahahaha

that is funny

If the kid is interested in a career in the real world, rather than in the NHL, I've often wondered why schools like Colorado College and Michigan Tech wouldn't be more attractive to them

CC is expensive
and just to do the math for you,
40 years at about $125K a year is 50 million (a paycheck you could easily get with a B.S. from Mich Tech)
when you consider how few guys make it to the NHL
and how few get a fat paycheck in the NHL
playing hockey to get an education isn't that bad a deal from a financial angle

TonyTheTiger20
02-18-2015, 01:21 PM
Critical Thinker on the other thread says:
If the B1G did get to play by different rules to attract better players, and then won more games, wouldn't that give more parity to college hockey?

hahahaha
That is fantastic

Call It
02-19-2015, 08:07 AM
So the Rich get Richer?! Would a student have to pay taxes on the $16,000? With budget issues at most public colleges, we might be shooting ourselves in the foot. Especially considering the next big bubble to pop is student loans!

How is it being player 19 on a team and 1-18 are now getting bonus money?

Eeyore
02-19-2015, 11:35 AM
Forgive me if this sounds ignorant but, what does "full cost of attendance" mean? If a kid is getting full ride or a 75% - 80% scholarship already how is it impacted?

This is kind of complicated. Originally, NCAA compliant athletic scholarships, defined in 1956, could include a $15/month stipend for living expenses; it was called "laundry money" as an example of the kind of thing that it was meant to cover. In the 1970s, the NCAA eliminated the stipend and so they covered nothing but tuition, room & board, and books. Then, in the 1980s, the federal government adjusted its financial aid programs and created the phrase "full cost of attendance scholarships" for things like Pell Grants and subsidized loan programs. This added categories that financial aid could cover, including a cost-of-living stipend (like the laundry money but more generous), travel from home to school for students whose parents didn't live near campus, and a number of other things.

The NCAA never adopted the full cost of attendance standard for what its scholarships were allowed to cover. That's what this legislation is changing; schools in the Power 5 conferences (Big 10; Big 12; Pac 12; SEC; ACC) are now permitted to offer scholarships valued at the full cost of attendance. Other conferences are mulling whether or not they are going to move in the same direction.

As to how it affects someone on a partial scholarship, what this does is it increases the dollar value of a full scholarship. If an athlete is on a 50% scholarship, the value of her grant goes up by 50% of the increase from the old value of the scholarship to the new value. A hockey team is permitted to allocate a total amount of scholarship dollars equal to 18 times the maximum value of each scholarship.

Eeyore
02-19-2015, 11:46 AM
So the Rich get Richer?!

It sort of depends upon how you look at it. It's equally possible to look at it from the level of the athlete and say that they are now getting all of their expenses covered.


Would a student have to pay taxes on the $16,000?

No, just as they don't currently pay taxes on the value of the scholarship they receive. That's why the NCAA legislation passed adjusts the allowable scholarship value to the federally defined full cost of scholarship. One of the purposes of that 1986 legislation was to establish what aid can be received tax free and what aid would be taxed. If the NCAA schools approved offering grants to athletes in amounts above the federal definition of full cost of attendance, then the athletes would probably have to pay taxes on the excess.

Also, I'm not sure where you came up with the $16,000 figure. The estimate is that this could raise the value of each scholarship by $2,000-$5,000 per year. There are a number of things affecting where in the range each scholarship would fall, including the cost of living on a given campus, where the student would be traveling to and from between semesters, and several school specific factors. The federal definition of "full cost of attendance" is not entirely clear cut and exactly what gets covered does vary from school to school. My understanding is that a university will need to use the same definition for its athletes that it uses for the general student body.


With budget issues at most public colleges, we might be shooting ourselves in the foot. Especially considering the next big bubble to pop is student loans!

Yes, there are definitely budget questions. I wouldn't for instance, expect UMD to start offering full cost of attendance scholarships, especially since they don't offer the maximum of what they are already allowed to.


How is it being player 19 on a team and 1-18 are now getting bonus money?

I suspect that this won't change that perspective at all.

OldDave
04-05-2015, 05:31 PM
The estimate is that this could raise the value of each scholarship by $2,000-$5,000 per year. There are a number of things affecting where in the range each scholarship would fall, including the cost of living on a given campus, where the student would be traveling to and from between semesters, and several school specific factors. The federal definition of "full cost of attendance" is not entirely clear cut and exactly what gets covered does vary from school to school. My understanding is that a university will need to use the same definition for its athletes that it uses for the general student body.


Despite the clarity of your post, I'm still stumbling over the details. I was hoping an example might help.

My favorite team is the Winona Frackettes, who have only one D1 program, the women’s hockey team. There are 24 women on the team. All 24 are on scholarship, 12 with full rides and 12 with partials. The value of a scholarship is $32,000: $12,000 tuition and fees and $20,000 other campus expenses (room and board, books, tutors, etc.). Half the partial scholarships are for $12,000, the other half are $20,000.

Eight of the women (four full scholarships and four partials) are from MN, and they all drive to and from campus at the start of the school year, for the holiday break, and at the end of the academic year. Their average travel cost is $100 one way. Two of these players (one full and one partial) have food allergies and cannot always partake at team meals. They each spend $1,800 out-of-pocket to purchase allergen-free food items per school year.

Eight of the women (four full and four partial) are from Canada, six from Ontario and 2 from Quebec. They all fly into Detroit and take a regional flight to the Rochester airport, from which they take the hourly van to campus. Their average travel cost is $1,000 one way.

Six players (three full and three partial) are from other parts of the US, two from California, two from Illinois, and one each from Michigan and New York. They all fly into Detroit and take the regional flight and van, same as the Canadians. Their average travel cost is $900 one way.

Two players are from Sweden (one full and one partial). They also fly into Detroit and take the regional flight and van. Their average travel cost is $2,500 one way, but they do not go home for the break. They need language translation services for classes that cost $1,600 total.

The student body is consistently around 8,000, of which 80% are from MN, 12% are from other states and Canada, and 8% are from overseas, primarily Pacific Rim countries. We can assume that non-scholarship costs of the hockey team members are reflective of the whole student body, with the exception that the students from the Pacific Rim have an average travel cost of $3,000 one way.

The school has committed to FCOA scholarships. How is the FCOA amount calculated and how often does the school need to recalculate it?

Thanks in advance for any help!

Eeyore
04-05-2015, 06:48 PM
The school has committed to FCOA scholarships. How is the FCOA amount calculated and how often does the school need to recalculate it?

I can't tell you, because it's going to vary from one school to another. As I said, the definition under federal law is sufficiently vague that each school has to come up with its own way to calculate it. What is required is that the definition for athletes must be the same as it is for all students.