PDA

View Full Version : Cost of Attendance, 2015-2016 season



Pages : [1] 2 3

blackswampboy
07-28-2015, 05:45 PM
According to today's http://www.uscho.com/from-the-press-box/2015/07/28/with-cost-of-attendance-stipend-in-place-in-some-places-we-wait-to-see-impact/, an anonymous survey has 22 DI hockey schools giving stipends this season, 21 not giving, and 7 still undecided.

What's with the anonymity? If this is gonna change the college hockey landscape, let's see who's doing the changing.
Of course the P5's will be on board, but what's BU doing? The WCHA has approved it, but so far looks like BGSU is the only conference team offering CoA this season.
So who else we got? Any DII/DIII schools going for it?

kwm4385
07-28-2015, 07:06 PM
I'm sure RIT can offer stipends if allowed to, but haven't heard any news one way or the other.
It's kind of a bandaid though since we still can't give scholarships in the first place.

manurespreader
07-29-2015, 08:35 AM
The whole thing is unfortunate if you ask me. We already have a number of schools who are struggling financially and this is a way the big time money schools like ASU can outcompete the small time guys for the top recruits.
I do think you will see a number of small profile schools doing it, and not that far down the line, because they will have no choice. I have no doubt that anyone who wants to remain competitive will have to get on board, and quickly.

Split-N
07-29-2015, 08:58 AM
The whole thing is unfortunate if you ask me. We already have a number of schools who are struggling financially and this is a way the big time money schools like ASU can outcompete the small time guys for the top recruits.
I do think you will see a number of small profile schools doing it, and not that far down the line, because they will have no choice. I have no doubt that anyone who wants to remain competitive will have to get on board, and quickly.

Unfortunately, I fear you're right. It looks to me like the "Power Five" has become a cartel that seeks to corner the market on revenue-producing sports by effectively pricing everyone else out of the market. My great fear is that the days of Division I college sports, as we've known and loved it, are numbered. In the meantime, mid-majors that either cannot or will not pony up the increased cost of maintaining a competitive program will revert to non-scholarship status while gifted athletes who were mesmerized by the siren song of a P5 school will find themselves rotting on the bench or used as a spare part.

So far as the effect on hockey is concerned, it looks to be a mixed bag. We already know that the B1G programs along with Boston College, Notre Dame, and UConn, each of which are P5 members, have already signed up. The non-P5 schools will likely split along the lines of those willing to pay the price and those that are either unable or unwilling to do so. I do see most of the NCHC programs signing up and some (but not all) of the WCHA. I really don't see any of the ECAC schools jumping on the bandwagon unless they change their core principles.

Hockey East will be interesting. We already know about BC, ND, and UConn but I'm not aware that any of the remaining programs have taken a position. BU and Northeastern can certainly afford it but, except for hockey, BU is a member of the Patriot League which is known to not favor COA, although I don't know that it has taken an official position. Northeastern Athletic Director Peter Roby led the opposition to the P5 autonomy measures at the NCAA meetings, so if NU goes along, it will be kicking and screaming. Providence, despite its well-deserved national championship, does not have especially deep institutional pockets while most of of the remaining state schools are facing budget pressures. So far as I know, none of the non-P5 HEA schools has taken a position and HEA itself seems to also be on radio silence.

TonyTheTiger20
07-29-2015, 10:41 AM
UConn isn't P5

Patman
07-29-2015, 10:46 AM
UConn isn't P5

For now, we both know that UConn will attempt to operate as close to one as possible.

Split-N
07-29-2015, 10:47 AM
UConn isn't P5

You're right. Sorry. But UConn has the look and feel of a P5 and certainly has the athletic resources. I fully expect them to go COA if they haven't already.

cF[Authentic]
07-29-2015, 10:50 AM
UND has stated they will fund it.

darker98
07-29-2015, 11:20 AM
;6183293']UND has stated they will fund it.
Yes in Hockey.
http://www.grandforksherald.com/news/local/3725957-und-pay-some-student-athletes-cost-attendance-and-some-living-expenses

TigerFan86-87
07-29-2015, 12:00 PM
Any DII/DIII schools going for it?
I find this possibility intriguing... CoA seems like a difficult thing to define for a D-III program. If you're not offering scholarships to begin with (or even only partial scholarships), how do you define the difference between scholarship and the true cost of attendance? Are the players limited as to what they're allowed to allocate that money to? And who decides how much of a stipend is too much? If a kid gets a $5000 stipend, then all he or she does is play hockey, go to class, study, eat, and sleep on campus while never leaving town (going home) or going out or spending money at all, can they use the leftovers of that money to offset tuition instead?
Other wonderings... Does every player on a given team get the same exact stipend? Do the members of different teams within a given school get the same stipends? If not, how is it decided who gets what? Players' value to the team, team's value ($) to the athletic department, as a consolation for some who may only get partial or no scholarships? This whole thing can get very expensive, especially at football schools. If every athlete all the way from the star quarterback down to the last bench warmer on the women's equestrian squad are all getting the same full stipend, that's a hefty chunk of change. If there are differences, there are going to be shouts of inequity and the system being unfair.

blackswampboy
07-29-2015, 02:27 PM
I find this possibility intriguing... CoA seems like a difficult thing to define for a D-III program. If you're not offering scholarships to begin with (or even only partial scholarships), how do you define the difference between scholarship and the true cost of attendance? Are the players limited as to what they're allowed to allocate that money to? And who decides how much of a stipend is too much? If a kid gets a $5000 stipend, then all he or she does is play hockey, go to class, study, eat, and sleep on campus while never leaving town (going home) or going out or spending money at all, can they use the leftovers of that money to offset tuition instead?
Other wonderings... Does every player on a given team get the same exact stipend? Do the members of different teams within a given school get the same stipends? If not, how is it decided who gets what? Players' value to the team, team's value ($) to the athletic department, as a consolation for some who may only get partial or no scholarships? This whole thing can get very expensive, especially at football schools. If every athlete all the way from the star quarterback down to the last bench warmer on the women's equestrian squad are all getting the same full stipend, that's a hefty chunk of change. If there are differences, there are going to be shouts of inequity and the system being unfair.

I don't think CoA is any harder to define for a DIII school, but seems unlikely that the conference would approve with no scholarships to begin with. But I could be wrong there.

The schools define their own stipend amount with some limits, I believe. And yes, the inequity is a huge concern.

No, every player does not get the same stipend. Transportation is included, with adjustments for in-state, out-of-state, and international students. But I believe the calculation is the same for all scholarships at a school, regardless of sport. There is corresponding adjustment for partial scholarships.

BGSU's projected additional cost for CoA this year at $470,500.

LtPowers
07-29-2015, 04:20 PM
I'm sure RIT can offer stipends if allowed to, but haven't heard any news one way or the other.
It's kind of a bandaid though since we still can't give scholarships in the first place.

The article seems to have limited the discussion to the 50 colleges that offer athletic scholarships, which implies that non-scholarship schools can't offer the stipend either.


Powers &8^]

FDNY99
07-30-2015, 09:43 AM
You're right. Sorry. But UConn has the look and feel of a P5 and certainly has the athletic resources. I fully expect them to go COA if they haven't already.


For now, we both know that UConn will attempt to operate as close to one as possible.


UConn isn't P5

UCONN is funding COA 100%, both the President and AD have been behind COA since it was first brought up.

TigerFan86-87
07-30-2015, 11:52 AM
The article seems to have limited the discussion to the 50 colleges that offer athletic scholarships, which implies that non-scholarship schools can't offer the stipend either.
Powers &8^]

It was mostly about those 50, but it did say: "Schools that are mainly in Division II or III but play in Division I for hockey can offer the stipends, and itís clear from the numbers that some will."

blackswampboy
07-30-2015, 02:13 PM
It was mostly about those 50, but it did say: "Schools that are mainly in Division II or III but play in Division I for hockey can offer the stipends, and itís clear from the numbers that some will."

It also pointed out that the WCHA could have limited BGSU's stipends for hockey--even though the school offers CoA for other sports.

The WCHA's statement:

We support NCAA legislation that redefines an athletics grant-in-aid to include up to the full cost of attendance, while allowing individual discretion to each institution on the amount they choose to provide within those parameters.
- See more at: http://www.wcha.com/men/pres1415/201507/july6wcm.php#sthash.GpVP80Jy.dpuf

LtPowers
07-31-2015, 10:15 AM
It was mostly about those 50, but it did say: "Schools that are mainly in Division II or III but play in Division I for hockey can offer the stipends, and it’s clear from the numbers that some will."

Those are two separate subjects. Most D-II and D-III colleges that play D-I hockey offer athletic scholarships. And the majority of colleges that don't are full D-I members.


Powers &8^]

Edited to add the list of non-athletic-scholarship universities in men's D-I hockey:

RIT (D-III, non-grandfathered)
Union (D-III, non-grandfathered by choice)
Air Force (service academy)
Army (service academy)
Harvard (ivy league)
Cornell (ivy league)
Brown (ivy league)
Dartmouth (ivy league)
Princeton (ivy league)
Yale (ivy league)

Split-N
07-31-2015, 12:30 PM
Bloomberg Television is reporting that a Federal appeals court has blocked the payment of stipends to college athletes. Stipends are outright cash payments and do not relate directly to COA, which is not affected. No other details yet.

komey1
08-03-2015, 12:16 PM
Part of me thinks that this won't change much because the teams that would likely offer COA will be the teams that were already getting the better recruits.

Split-N
08-03-2015, 12:23 PM
Part of me thinks that this won't change much because the teams that would likely offer COA will be the teams that were already getting the better recruits.

You got it: The rich will get richer.

blackswampboy
08-11-2015, 12:43 PM
Fear The Triangle ‏@FearTheTriangle 16 minutes ago
Fear The Triangle retweeted UMass Athletics
Big news. @UMassADBamford announces that UMass will provide Cost Of Attendance stipends for ALL sports