PDA

View Full Version : UAA and Cost of Attendance



Pages : [1] 2

Wolfman
07-08-2015, 01:57 PM
This is just another nail in the coffin for me sliding downward of my support for UAA. Just saw a story on KTVA (http://www.ktva.com/uaa-no-stipend-for-hockey-players-802/) about UAA NOT supporting COA.

While I understand that the State of Alaska is in this huge fiscal gap and it translates the UA System losing all kinds of money, It is the principle for me that UAA lacks any future plan for any sort of increasing the stature of UAA Athletics. This whole dang school should be focused on the end goal of gaining into a great Division I conference like the Big West, WCC or even Big Sky. Even with the lack of a football team (which we should already have), the goal should be to get into a good conference in DIVISION I.

Steve Hackett in the interview says "we don't have the revenue from the "big" conference from a TV package...etc. etc.) well, dang it, go out and get into these conferences that provide this money!!! UAA has always had any lack of future vision!!! I am telling you if UAA where in the Big West or WCC and we routinely played Gonzaga caliber teams in basketball, THE STANDS WOULD BE FULL AT THE AAC.

Look at the other message boards. They are WANTING UAA in their conference! Even Mr. Hurd in the WAC at one time indicated to me that he was going to reach out to UAA! But, the lack of a vision or goal for UAA to increase its Athletic stature in mind-boggling even for the school of it's size.

It really is a joke. It makes Alumni like me who is very passionate about my School want to PUKE! And now, instead of FIGURING out how to pay COS to be competitive to get the best recruits, we just throw our hands up and say "SO BE IT." Why I ever chose to go to UAA is beyond me. I really have a love/hate relationship with this school.

Bravo to Bowling Green, and others for vision. Bravo for Arizona State. I bet smaller schools like Minn State and Mich Tech will figure this out.

Suze
07-08-2015, 03:28 PM
I'm shocked that the NCAA even proposed this.

JohnsonsJerseys
07-08-2015, 03:53 PM
I'm shocked that the NCAA even proposed this.
The NCAA didn't propose this. A handful of schools with football programs who make millions in profits annually, with money to burn, in an arms race for top talent, who feel that giving their "student-athletes" a larger "salary", excuse me "cost of attendance" will make them more competitive against their rivals proposed this silly concept. Hockey just got swept up in this joke of legislation because it is a D-I sport.

Quite frankly, if your scholarship (full or part) isn't enough for you to attend college, find a less expensive school, a better scholarship offer, take out a loan or get a job. To try and convince people that only getting a portion of your education costs covered is an unbearable hardship, I'm sure there are plenty of kids out there that would love to have that "hardship". This has nothing to do with kids affording college, it is all about recruiting and making sure the "have" schools stay as far ahead of the "have-nots" as possible.

Ryan J

blackswampboy
07-08-2015, 04:47 PM
Bravo to Bowling Green, and others for vision.

I don't think BGSU has much choice in the matter, but not at all thrilled with what it means for college hockey.
And we may be able to cover the costs, but there will be a piper to pay. Hello, increased student fees. And there's this:

"BGSU essentially will pay for cost of attendance with football games away from home. The Falcons’ football team plays three road games during the nonconference schedule — as opposed to the normal two — earning three six-digit guarantees and paying only one.
This season, the Falcons play at Maryland and at Purdue, and they will go to Nashville for a game against Tennessee."
That's five and seven, home and away. bah.

http://www.bcsn.tv/news_article/show/530967

Squarebanks
07-08-2015, 05:13 PM
Another nail in the coffin of the NCAA as we know it.

joecct
07-08-2015, 05:27 PM
The NCAA didn't propose this. A handful of schools with football programs who make millions in profits annually, with money to burn, in an arms race for top talent, who feel that giving their "student-athletes" a larger "salary", excuse me "cost of attendance" will make them more competitive against their rivals proposed this silly concept. Hockey just got swept up in this joke of legislation because it is a D-I sport.

Quite frankly, if your scholarship (full or part) isn't enough for you to attend college, find a less expensive school, a better scholarship offer, take out a loan or get a job. To try and convince people that only getting a portion of your education costs covered is an unbearable hardship, I'm sure there are plenty of kids out there that would love to have that "hardship". This has nothing to do with kids affording college, it is all about recruiting and making sure the "have" schools stay as far ahead of the "have-nots" as possible.

Ryan J

As a scholarship athlete, you can't get a part time job, say at the local tattoo parlor, while your non scholarship girlfriend is getting her spending money at the same place.

Spartanforlife4
07-08-2015, 06:32 PM
The NCAA didn't propose this. A handful of schools with football programs who make millions in profits annually, with money to burn, in an arms race for top talent, who feel that giving their "student-athletes" a larger "salary", excuse me "cost of attendance" will make them more competitive against their rivals proposed this silly concept. Hockey just got swept up in this joke of legislation because it is a D-I sport.

Quite frankly, if your scholarship (full or part) isn't enough for you to attend college, find a less expensive school, a better scholarship offer, take out a loan or get a job. To try and convince people that only getting a portion of your education costs covered is an unbearable hardship, I'm sure there are plenty of kids out there that would love to have that "hardship". This has nothing to do with kids affording college, it is all about recruiting and making sure the "have" schools stay as far ahead of the "have-nots" as possible.

Ryan J

The part about this whole ordeal that makes me laugh is the stipend talk started out of compensating football and basketball players. Sure, they're the ones getting the big TV deals, but when you think about it, the non-revenue kids need it more. Those football and basketball players are already earning full rides. If they're truly poor they can get Pell Grants, per diems, and some other NCAA rules for some extra cash. It's the kids playing hockey, baseball, and soccer that need the stipends. They're only getting partial scholarships despite putting in the same effort and commitment.

Suze
07-08-2015, 07:57 PM
The NCAA didn't propose this. A handful of schools with football programs who make millions in profits annually, with money to burn, in an arms race for top talent, who feel that giving their "student-athletes" a larger "salary", excuse me "cost of attendance" will make them more competitive against their rivals proposed this silly concept. Hockey just got swept up in this joke of legislation because it is a D-I sport.

Quite frankly, if your scholarship (full or part) isn't enough for you to attend college, find a less expensive school, a better scholarship offer, take out a loan or get a job. To try and convince people that only getting a portion of your education costs covered is an unbearable hardship, I'm sure there are plenty of kids out there that would love to have that "hardship". This has nothing to do with kids affording college, it is all about recruiting and making sure the "have" schools stay as far ahead of the "have-nots" as possible.

Ryan J

But still, the NCAA was in favor of and approved it. Considering their track record when it comes to student athletes and money, it's ludicrous.

blackswampboy
07-08-2015, 08:41 PM
The part about this whole ordeal that makes me laugh

Bet you all are rolling on the floor that the cost of attendance in East Lansing is only $1,866, but PSU gets to hand out $4,788 for living in Happy Valley. And who knew that the cost of attendance at middle-of-nowhere Auburn is four times BC's? ho ho ho.

Critical Thinker
07-08-2015, 09:22 PM
But still, the NCAA was in favor of and approved it. Considering their track record when it comes to student athletes and money, it's ludicrous.

They probably only went along with it to keep the Ohio States and the Alabamas around to prevent them from splitting off and creating their own professional league.

Seawolf Fan
07-08-2015, 10:42 PM
Another nail in the coffin of the NCAA as we know it.
As usual the UA_ hangover has clouded your thinking.
NCAA did this to keep the lawyers from coming after them for making kbillions on "amateur" athletes backs and the "amateurs" got nothing.
Compared with football & basketball TV revenues do you really think the NCAA gives a hoot about the niche sports?
Really?

Squarebanks
07-09-2015, 12:54 AM
As usual the UA_ hangover has clouded your thinking.
NCAA did this to keep the lawyers from coming after them for making kbillions on "amateur" athletes backs and the "amateurs" got nothing.
Compared with football & basketball TV revenues do you really think the NCAA gives a hoot about the niche sports?
Really?

Well duh. NCAA is going along with it because they know **** well the power 4 (I say 4 because the Big 12 is a joke right now) conferences are more and more interested in autonomy. Heck, the SEC by itself is one of the wealthiest sports entities in the country, college or professional.

What this move will ensure (and hence my original comment) is that the rich stay rich and the poor stay poor. And that disparity will likely be even greater in college hockey. The somewhat even footing that our WCHA paupers once had with the Minnesotas and Michigans of the world is long, long, long gone.

I think Wolfman is right to a degree, eventually us smaller schools need to look seriously at a COA of some sort to stay competitive. But it won't happen anytime soon in Alaska with our present fiscal environment and legislators chomping at the bit to wipe out UAF/A athletics.

If I had to make a long term guess, I think the power 4 conferences will break away to some degree and the NCAA will become an entity for smaller programs. But what do I know, I sell bait out of a van.

mmf
07-09-2015, 01:09 AM
Wait until we see a lawsuit claiming that staying in college and forfeiting a professional entry level salary should be part of cost of attendance (lost opportunity). It would be interesting to see the bidding wars among those athletic programs with money to burn.

Alaska Hockey
07-11-2015, 01:42 PM
Wait until we see a lawsuit claiming that staying in college and forfeiting a professional entry level salary should be part of cost of attendance (lost opportunity). It would be interesting to see the bidding wars among those athletic programs with money to burn.

Did UA_ burn up their entire “lost opportunity funds” when the NCAA mucky-mucks stuck them with a compulsory fine?

uaafanblog
07-13-2015, 08:45 PM
The NCAA didn't propose this. A handful of schools with football programs who make millions in profits annually, with money to burn, in an arms race for top talent, who feel that giving their "student-athletes" a larger "salary", excuse me "cost of attendance" will make them more competitive against their rivals proposed this silly concept. Hockey just got swept up in this joke of legislation because it is a D-I sport.

Quite frankly, if your scholarship (full or part) isn't enough for you to attend college, find a less expensive school, a better scholarship offer, take out a loan or get a job. To try and convince people that only getting a portion of your education costs covered is an unbearable hardship, I'm sure there are plenty of kids out there that would love to have that "hardship". This has nothing to do with kids affording college, it is all about recruiting and making sure the "have" schools stay as far ahead of the "have-nots" as possible.

Ryan J
Bull****. Young adults entering into an agreement with a public or private institution to trade their considerable athletic talents in ways that generate revenues (in some cases huge revenues) fully deserve compensation. The NCAA has long taken advantage of essentially "slave labor" conditions on a wide range of athletes. It's been shameful and it's time it is beginning to end.

SJHovey
07-14-2015, 08:47 AM
Bull****. Young adults entering into an agreement with a public or private institution to trade their considerable athletic talents in ways that generate revenues (in some cases huge revenues) fully deserve compensation. The NCAA has long taken advantage of essentially "slave labor" conditions on a wide range of athletes. It's been shameful and it's time it is beginning to end.Slave labor. That's funny stuff.

The "woe is the student athlete" nonsense cracks me up. Kids, and their parents, dream of the idea the kid might get to participate in this "slave labor." They spend thousands out of their own pocket just to send the kids to camps with the hope of attracting a "slave master" to choose them. They call a press conference to announce their entry into this athletics Auschwitz.

When they get chosen, they are handed free room and board and an education, along with a lottery ticket for a pro athletic career. Very few lottery tickets pay off, but they get one nonetheless.

The deal with the devil made by professional sports leagues, colleges and college athletes is one they've all entered into willingly, and there isn't a one of them that would give up what they have right now. This is just gluttons fighting over pie.

Critical Thinker
07-14-2015, 10:10 PM
Bull****. Young adults entering into an agreement with a public or private institution to trade their considerable athletic talents in ways that generate revenues (in some cases huge revenues) fully deserve compensation. The NCAA has long taken advantage of essentially "slave labor" conditions on a wide range of athletes. It's been shameful and it's time it is beginning to end.

If these kids feel like they deserve to be paid, they shouldn't have freely chosen to play in an amateur league.

uaafanblog
07-15-2015, 05:04 AM
Slave labor. That's funny stuff.

The "woe is the student athlete" nonsense cracks me up. Kids, and their parents, dream of the idea the kid might get to participate in this "slave labor." They spend thousands out of their own pocket just to send the kids to camps with the hope of attracting a "slave master" to choose them. They call a press conference to announce their entry into this athletics Auschwitz.
Your derisively inane rebuttal also lacks reality ... here's why: The NCAA is the only game in town. The NCAA has created a system of labor (and by every legal definition applied anywhere outside of the NCAA it is indeed labor) over generations. They have controlled access to professional careers de facto forcing young athletes to play by their rules. Get off the farm once and see the world around you. In your world the day before an athlete signs a contract to play professionally for 1 million dollars a year his market value was only the cost of his education, room and board. But it wasn't. The day before and the day before that that kid's market value was 1 million and his slave owner school was getting away with housing, feeding and educating him for all of a maximum of about 50K a year. Also watch a South Park episode and learn something.


The deal with the devil made by professional sports leagues, colleges and college athletes is one they've all entered into willingly, and there isn't a one of them that would give up what they have right now. This is just gluttons fighting over pie.
The existence of the monopoly and one's participation in it isn't an act of will. It's an act of necessity. A necessity born by a generational conspiracy to ensure NCAA hegemony over that demographic of the athletic marketplace.

uaafanblog
07-15-2015, 05:08 AM
If these kids feel like they deserve to be paid, they shouldn't have freely chosen to play in an amateur league.


It's categorically not a choice. You're thirsty having been stuck in the desert without a drink for a couple of days. Guy that raped and murdered a young girl in 1990 puts a glass of water in front of you. Say's you can choose to drink it or not. But you know you might not find another glass of water today. There's no choice. The NCAA is the only game in town.

davyd83
07-15-2015, 06:40 AM
It's categorically not a choice. You're thirsty having been stuck in the desert without a drink for a couple of days. Guy that raped and murdered a young girl in 1990 puts a glass of water in front of you. Say's you can choose to drink it or not. But you know you might not find another glass of water today. There's no choice. The NCAA is the only game in town.

Many of these "kids" are over 18. Most over 20. They have an option if they wish to get paid, one that also comes with in season housing right there in Anchorage. The Aces.