Professional and College Basketball Forums banner

1621 - 1640 of 1649 Posts

·
Registered
Joined
·
3,594 Posts
Don't get me started on the whole Cost of Admission expense to college athletics. That's just SO DUMB. "It costs the athletics department $70,000 per scholarship at Fordham and only $42,000 at Bonaventure!" No. Both schools -- every school -- is stupid. The cost to put a scholarship athlete into school is the cost of a chair. Why is this actual money Athletics has to come up with? I have no idea.
To clarify, I didn't mean any posted was so dumb. I meant the practice of schools getting reimbursed from athletics for the cost of a scholarship is just dumb. Why is athletics being billed an opportunity cost to the school when one really does not exist? AND when it was the school's decision to play athletics at that level anyway?

It's never made any sense to me because it's just dumb. And if they're charging full dollar amount, like if VCU athletics is paying the school $46,000 per scholarship, that's extra dumb. Because $46,000 is the cost of an out-of-state student staying on campus. The athletes are staying on campus, but the out-of-state and in-state price differential just shows you how bullshit the cost of college is.

If VCU wants to say "well, athletics, you owe us $11,504 for on-campus housing for your scholarship athletes" then THAT makes at least SOME sense. Because the DORMS are the only limiting agent. The EDUCATION is nothing more than adding an extra chair to a classroom. But the reality is, VCU as a school decided "We need to have Division I athletics, so we're going to charge our own department of athletics money they pay to US for the cost of a scholarship being given and not sold; even though They (athletics) are Us (VCU) and we created that department ourselves.

It's insanity.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
2,729 Posts
Nice post JAF_1962. Our media contract was extended for 3 years for a reason. Don't think LaSalle will be around for the next media contract.
From fitch rating that JAF_1962 mentioned.


LaSalle may need to further reduce athletics to preserve their financial health and hence the speculation they may need to leave the A10 and reduce coaching salaries as well.

Here is the full Fitch downgrade rating of LaSalle.
https://www.fitchratings.com/resear...vs-to-bb-outlook-revised-to-stable-28-09-2020
Steve, it wasn’t my intention to imply that LaSalle was on the brink of closing their doors. I don’t think that’s necessarily true or that they will leave the A10 anytime soon.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
2,729 Posts
To clarify, I didn't mean any posted was so dumb. I meant the practice of schools getting reimbursed from athletics for the cost of a scholarship is just dumb. Why is athletics being billed an opportunity cost to the school when one really does not exist? AND when it was the school's decision to play athletics at that level anyway?

It's never made any sense to me because it's just dumb. And if they're charging full dollar amount, like if VCU athletics is paying the school $46,000 per scholarship, that's extra dumb. Because $46,000 is the cost of an out-of-state student staying on campus. The athletes are staying on campus, but the out-of-state and in-state price differential just shows you how bullshit the cost of college is.

If VCU wants to say "well, athletics, you owe us $11,504 for on-campus housing for your scholarship athletes" then THAT makes at least SOME sense. Because the DORMS are the only limiting agent. The EDUCATION is nothing more than adding an extra chair to a classroom. But the reality is, VCU as a school decided "We need to have Division I athletics, so we're going to charge our own department of athletics money they pay to US for the cost of a scholarship being given and not sold; even though They (athletics) are Us (VCU) and we created that department ourselves.

It's insanity.
There is a cost to the school for an athletic scholarship, so the athletic budget has to be charged for the cost otherwise the school’s administration wouldn’t know the true cost of its athletic department. Who knows in real life how schools allocate the cost of tuition, and room and board for athletics, schlolarships / grants, or even benefits such as free tuition for children of employees. That would be something that a retired CPA would know.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
3,023 Posts
Steve, it wasn’t my intention to imply that LaSalle was on the brink of closing their doors. I don’t think that’s necessarily true or that they will leave the A10 anytime soon.
Think LaSalle will be ok as a university, but could see them scaling back more in athletics.

sjhawks, have complete distain for Gola Arena as an A10 venue. It's a figgin' high school gym!.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
3,359 Posts
Think LaSalle will be ok as a university, but could see them scaling back more in athletics.

sjhawks, have complete distain for Gola Arena as an A10 venue. It's a figgin' high school gym!.
This is a perfectly acceptable opinion. Are there even any schools in the MAAC that don't have end line seating? I didn't know much about Gola or the TruMark Center which apparently houses the court and their swimming facilities. It appears costs (corners) were cut for a building that opened in 1998. Why there wouldn't be a full perimeter of seating at least at the floor level? And who was still building 6 lane swimming pools in 1998? Those are somewhat baffling decisions when you look at what else was being built by the end of the 1990's.

I'm sure LaSalle faces a lot of the same financial strains that have affected SBU, and the RC was opened mid-60s so building costs were not nearly what they are today, even adjusted for inflation. But you have to think if LaSalle had squeezed just a little bit extra, minor changes, the Gola would not be substandard. Maybe 4000 seats, a better look, but it has to be a drawback with recruiting. The exit door to the hallway just kills me. You could go flying to save a rebound and end up in an adjunct yoga session.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,124 Posts
Just going to throw this out there:

The non-UMass schools of the A10 should be rooting for more universities (like ODU) to go indy in Football. The AAC got less attractive to UMass with UCONN leaving (not that we were going to be invited any time soon...), but with UCONN going independent suddenly we have a natural rival to play every year. With enough independents in a scheduling agreement there are going to be less thoughts of "where can UMass get all of its sports, with Football leading the way" and more of a "oh hey this is pretty good, let's finally focus on being the best A10 program we can be."

We're not going to drop football any time soon. So at least that scenario would be better for the rest of the A10.



Edit: to be clear, this is not to say "the A10 should invite a bunch of schools in to encourage them to go independent"
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
3,594 Posts
There is a cost to the school for an athletic scholarship, so the athletic budget has to be charged for the cost otherwise the school’s administration wouldn’t know the true cost of its athletic department. Who knows in real life how schools allocate the cost of tuition, and room and board for athletics, schlolarships / grants, or even benefits such as free tuition for children of employees. That would be something that a retired CPA would know.
This is my fundamental disagreement with the accounting practice. There's NOT a cost to "the school" from the athletics department, because THE SCHOOL decided to have an ATHLETICS DEPARTMENT, WHICH IS PART OF THE SCHOOL. VCU has to pay VCU for letting a student into VCU? Remove $20 from your wallet and put it in your front pocket. How much money do you have?

I understand completely that the school is getting a reimbursement from athletics for the OPPORTUNITY COST of selling that seat/dorm room to someone else. I'm merely saying it's redundant and pointless and redundantly pointless.

I'm using VCU as an example because as a public school their financials are more easily found. VCU the school charges student fees, and those fees include $558 per student earmarked to go to the athletics department. "In 2017, the fees brought in $19.9 million, or 58 percent of VCU Athletics’ revenue." (per RichmondBizsense).

If VCU is fully funding scholarships for all their programs, that's 136.9 scholarships. Which per year, at the out-of-state, room and board** price tag of $46,000 = $6.3 million.

Look at it this way. If the President and AD got on the same page and said "Let's do this... let's give athletics less of those fees per student, but waive the reimbursement from athletics for the 136.9 scholarships." Money comes out as a total wash, doesn't it?

It's overcomplicating it for the purpose of what? Being confusing to hide the true cost? That's the only explanation I see.

Just waive the reimbursement, lower the subsidy by the exact same amount, downsize your athletics and university business office by one employee each, and spend their salaries somewhere else, everyone comes out ahead!
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
6,995 Posts
There is a cost to the school for an athletic scholarship, so the athletic budget has to be charged for the cost otherwise the school’s administration wouldn’t know the true cost of its athletic department. Who knows in real life how schools allocate the cost of tuition, and room and board for athletics, schlolarships / grants, or even benefits such as free tuition for children of employees. That would be something that a retired CPA would know.
Jaffie, I think schools should just let all the accounting students attend for free, and allocate the cost to the athletics department.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
6,995 Posts
This is my fundamental disagreement with the accounting practice. There's NOT a cost to "the school" from the athletics department, because THE SCHOOL decided to have an ATHLETICS DEPARTMENT, WHICH IS PART OF THE SCHOOL. VCU has to pay VCU for letting a student into VCU? Remove $20 from your wallet and put it in your front pocket. How much money do you have?

I understand completely that the school is getting a reimbursement from athletics for the OPPORTUNITY COST of selling that seat/dorm room to someone else. I'm merely saying it's redundant and pointless and redundantly pointless.

I'm using VCU as an example because as a public school their financials are more easily found. VCU the school charges student fees, and those fees include $558 per student earmarked to go to the athletics department. "In 2017, the fees brought in $19.9 million, or 58 percent of VCU Athletics’ revenue." (per RichmondBizsense).

If VCU is fully funding scholarships for all their programs, that's 136.9 scholarships. Which per year, at the out-of-state, room and board** price tag of $46,000 = $6.3 million.

Look at it this way. If the President and AD got on the same page and said "Let's do this... let's give athletics less of those fees per student, but waive the reimbursement from athletics for the 136.9 scholarships." Money comes out as a total wash, doesn't it?

It's overcomplicating it for the purpose of what? Being confusing to hide the true cost? That's the only explanation I see.

Just waive the reimbursement, lower the subsidy by the exact same amount, downsize your athletics and university business office by one employee each, and spend their salaries somewhere else, everyone comes out ahead!
jp, I’m not going to put in nearly the number of hours and keyboard pecks as you on this, but there is value in colleges and universities understanding the economics of all of their programs/departments - whether they are in the schools of business, arts and sciences, communications, health professions, or whatever, including the athletics department.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
3,892 Posts
jp, I’m not going to put in nearly the number of hours and keyboard pecks as you on this, but there is value in colleges and universities understanding the economics of all of their programs/departments - whether they are in the schools of business, arts and sciences, communications, health professions, or whatever, including the athletics department.
I don't disagree at all, 84, but I think jp's point is that the economics and the accounting can be two different things, particularly at the margin. As you know, the incremental cost of a particular action can be very different from how it might appear on the books.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
6,995 Posts
Lecture? I know that you would never do that, res. Having said that, I am a little worried that you might be calling into question the integrity of accountants.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
7,752 Posts
I may simply be wanting for entertainment, but I would look forward to whatever sort of battle would take place between economists and accountants.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
3,594 Posts
I DID warn you guys not to get me started on the topic.

I feel like the only reason the accounting practice is done this way is to complicate things on purpose in the NCAA's policy on amateurism and the evergreen battle on campuses between academics and athletics. Having athletics reimburse the university for scholarships adds millions to the expenses of athletics, even though the university is subsidizing athletics at a larger amount, but it shows to the academic folks "athletics pays us for the spots in the classroom, they're not taking away someone else's opportunity."

As a college athletics fan, I'm like "How about you don't ask for the reimbursement and let athletics spend $6 million more on being good at basketball?"
 
1621 - 1640 of 1649 Posts
Top