It takes more than just getting to college...

Wow ... I don't know how I made it as a college athlete!
The university provided for my room, board, fees, books, and tuition and all I had to do was something that I loved doing. Oh that's right ... I didn't have to pay for my xbox 360, my playstation3, my wii, my android, my iphones, my ipods or my tablets. I also took the bus or drove my hoopdy car. I didn't worry about working because I didn't need too. Society has spoiled kids rotten and too many have a sense of entitlement.
 
Shadow, I'm not saying money enough for luxury items... the kids need money to do laundry, to get a pizza with their buddies some nights, or to take a girl out on a date every now and again. I know you/we all live in a world where we had that given to us already via our upbringing being a blessed one, but some of these kids aren't so lucky. I'm not saying every kid is in that situation or that there wouldn't be attempted abuses of any new system, but there should be SOME change here. I think you'll find that a vast majority of division 1 athletes understand how blessed they are to have their education paid for. They also work an extreme number of hours on their sports as a part of that agreement. It's what they choose to do. The amount of money made off of them by entities outside of the school especially but then the university itself via licensing fees and such should in some manner be given back to those athletes. I fully believe if you give some small amount for these small excess needs, you'll see the number of rules violations drop significantly.
 
"regardless of what your high class condescending rear end thinks."

Gee MC, did you study propaganda strategies or what...the pseudo populist class warfare stuff sure works for some, not so much for you. I don't think the "occupy" crowd would really get behind your plan to take from the average college student $$$ every semester (READ: Athletic fees) so it can be re-distributed to a BigMan/Women on Campus elite for the purpose of allowing them "to get a pizza with their buddies some nights, or to take a girl out on a date every now and again." Yes, dear ordinary student, "MC Hammer" has decreed you must know your betters and taxes must be paid to expand the athletic first culture, even if it means you won't be debt free by 2040. MC, jocksniffing has its limits, they may still not talk to you even if you give them pizza and date money, you may just not be someone they want to know. Then again, you may be playing favorites regarding athletes. Does the $2000/multi-year scholorship apply to every athlete at a college or university? Is it for D1 level full grant in aid scholarships only or does athletes in proportional scholarship "olympic" sports also get the money and multi-year scholarship? What about DII/NAIA athletes? Do they get it? If you are going to be fair, oh populist ruler, you need to extend it to DIII athletes. They have the same time constraints and want the same pizza and date money as D1 athletes...Please don't tell me oh Dear Leader that the cut of is a 40 time of under 4.4 and the ability to slam dunk!

We wait with baited breath for the Great Arbiter MC to tell us who this GREAT ENTITLEMENT will benefit and who (well, we already know who: US!) will "provide" it. Cha Ching!
 
Again, I'm not talking politics Greyhound. You're the one pulling it back there everytime. I should have stayed out of this and now I'm done and out. Peace.
 
Greyhound 83 said:
The moniker sure fits, being just a fan accurately describes the limits of your ability to grasp an issue beyond your small anecdotal frame of reference.
Click to expand...

Are you capable of having a dialogue without such arrogance and degredation?

Greyhound 83 said:
Do you know anything about statistical sampling? Sorry, you can't find out the majors of 100% of student athletes and most (DIII) are not even getting scholarship money.
Click to expand...

Yes, I do know a thing or two about statistical sampling...I have four research studies published in refereed journals. Sampling that fails to incorporate critical aspects such as randomization and representativeness renders questionable findings that can't be generalized.

I didn't say anything about determining the majors of 100% of student athletes. But, if you want to be able to generalize the findings to the whole, then the whole must be represented.

Greyhound 83 said:
...If the taxpayer is going to have to pay at least a share of this, an examination of what the "student athletes" who would benefit from these payments are studying is warranted.
Click to expand...

I didn't say a study wasn't warrented. I'm saying that the study ought to be methodological sound so that the results carry validity. I'm all for examining the courses taken and majors of scholarship athletes. But, if it's being done to assure that taxpayer money is being well spent, then we should also be studying all of the non-athlete students who get grants and scholarships.

Greyhound 83 said:
...As for universities mismanaging funds from the perspective of a state or county employee, maybe the pot is calling the kettle black:

http://www.daytondailynews.com/news...courage-school-retire-rehire-deals-772772.htm

http://www.daytondailynews.com/news...ion-system-1183006.html?viewAsSinglePage=true
Click to expand...

I'm not retired, I'm not disabled, and I'm not getting a pension. So, what's the relevance? By the way, the last time I checked, there were private colleges/universities in the country that don't have government employees.

Greyhound 83 said:
Again, your assumption that "There are very few employees of a college that generate more revenue for the school than their athletes/teams do." has been proven wrong in previous posts. Fair to say research funding brought in by professors, institutional research centers and medical centers far outstrips the thousands of dollars the UConn women's basketball team makes. Again, only FOURTEEN D1 Schools made money on athletics in the 2009 survey. There is no $$$ pay for this NEW ENTITLEMENT without raising fees or taxes or cutting non-athletic spending.
Click to expand...

Of course medical centers generate more revenue than the UCONN women's basketball team. But, you're taking the highest revenue source from academics and comparing it to one of the lowest revuenue sources for athletics...apples to oranges. Regardless, you've overlooked the many, many college professors and programs that bring few if any research dollars to their program or university. You're also overlooking the fact that, in many cases, universities add funds to the research grants to actually be able to conduct the research.

Only 14 schools made money on athletics based on what revenue sources? The article that you posted doesn't provide that level of detail. I'm going to go out on a limb and suggest that, once you factor in something as simple as sales of clothing and souveniers, many if not most of those college athletic programs are doing just fine.

Greyhound 83 said:
You may also want to broaden your perspective regarding government spending:

http://www.nypost.com/p/news/opinio..._XPdPEG8atzm1PiyHXOf14K?CMP=OTC-rss&FEEDNAME=

I guess you guys failed to program your out year budgets as well as the guys in NY, whose annual spending went up 13%! Fact is cuts are coming or taxes are going way up...Is it time for another NEW ENTITLEMENT?!? Maybe the state should pay for the increased money they send to universities to cover this by cutting state employee positions, huh Just a Fan?
Click to expand...

LOL, I don't live or work in NY. Either way, the article doesn't say that NY's annual spending went up 13%, it says that the 2011 spending (including federally funded programs) is 13% higher than it was in fiscal year 2008. Probably not coincidental, the author of the editorial failed to indicate whether federal dollars also increased since 2008.

News flash...public state and local agencies have been cutting positions for at least the past five years. The Hamilton County JFS has reduced staff by nearly 50%. The Ohio Department of Mental Health reduced their staff by approximately 30%. The agency that I work at has had a 32% reduction in staff (54 to 37), including the elimination of four administrative positions. Most school districts have also made significant cuts in their staffing. What Ohio colleges had a 30% reduction in staff over the past five years?

To bring this long post full circle....based on the link that you provided, the athletes account for 15% of total expenses in the budget yet they're the source of the majority of the revenue. They aren't the reason that colleges are "losing" money with their sports programs.

On that note, I'll give you the last word....time for me to move on to more important things. It's been fun.
 
just a fan said:
Are you capable of having a dialogue without such arrogance and degredation?



Yes, I do know a thing or two about statistical sampling...I have four research studies published in refereed journals. Sampling that fails to incorporate critical aspects such as randomization and representativeness renders questionable findings that can't be generalized.

I didn't say anything about determining the majors of 100% of student athletes. But, if you want to be able to generalize the findings to the whole, then the whole must be represented.



I didn't say a study wasn't warrented. I'm saying that the study ought to be methodological sound so that the results carry validity. I'm all for examining the courses taken and majors of scholarship athletes. But, if it's being done to assure that taxpayer money is being well spent, then we should also be studying all of the non-athlete students who get grants and scholarships.



I'm not retired, I'm not disabled, and I'm not getting a pension. So, what's the relevance? By the way, the last time I checked, there were private colleges/universities in the country that don't have government employees.



Of course medical centers generate more revenue than the UCONN women's basketball team. But, you're taking the highest revenue source from academics and comparing it to one of the lowest revuenue sources for athletics...apples to oranges. Regardless, you've overlooked the many, many college professors and programs that bring few if any research dollars to their program or university. You're also overlooking the fact that, in many cases, universities add funds to the research grants to actually be able to conduct the research.

Only 14 schools made money on athletics based on what revenue sources? The article that you posted doesn't provide that level of detail. I'm going to go out on a limb and suggest that, once you factor in something as simple as sales of clothing and souveniers, many if not most of those college athletic programs are doing just fine.



LOL, I don't live or work in NY. Either way, the article doesn't say that NY's annual spending went up 13%, it says that the 2011 spending (including federally funded programs) is 13% higher than it was in fiscal year 2008. Probably not coincidental, the author of the editorial failed to indicate whether federal dollars also increased since 2008.

News flash...public state and local agencies have been cutting positions for at least the past five years. The Hamilton County JFS has reduced staff by nearly 50%. The Ohio Department of Mental Health reduced their staff by approximately 30%. The agency that I work at has had a 32% reduction in staff (54 to 37), including the elimination of four administrative positions. Most school districts have also made significant cuts in their staffing. What Ohio colleges had a 30% reduction in staff over the past five years?

To bring this long post full circle....based on the link that you provided, the athletes account for 15% of total expenses in the budget yet they're the source of the majority of the revenue. They aren't the reason that colleges are "losing" money with their sports programs.

On that note, I'll give you the last word....time for me to move on to more important things. It's been fun.
Click to expand...

Checkmate.
 
"I'll give you the last word."

You don't give me anything, fan, it is called freedom of speech and suffice it to say I have earned mine and protected yours while you have been working your REM*state/county job.

"Are you capable of having a dialogue without such arrogance and degredation" (sic)

Check the thread fan, I have been told I'm an asinine, condescending
high class rear end...I can pretty much guarantee I have been to more H$!! holes then everyone posting combined, no silver spoon here.

"going to go out on a limb and suggest that, once you factor in something as simple as sales of clothing and souveniers, many if not most of those college athletic programs are doing just fine."

For such a peer-reviewed researcher, you sure are not supporting your argument, are you? Show the basis for your conclusion. You want to savage my supporting evidence, yet provide NONE of your own. You know what they say about opinions...

"...by the way, the last time I checked, there were private colleges/universities in the country that don't have government employees."

No, but your knowledge of research grants SHOULD mean you are aware private institutions are major recipients of government research awards. Take a look at NIH's annual awards and you will find quite a few are given to private institutions. Government spending and waste touches everyone.

"News flash...public state and local agencies have been cutting positions for at least the past five years. The Hamilton County JFS has reduced staff by nearly 50%. The Ohio Department of Mental Health reduced their staff by approximately 30%. The agency that I work at has had a 32% reduction in staff (54 to 37), including the elimination of four administrative positions. Most school districts have also made significant cuts in their staffing. What Ohio colleges had a 30% reduction in staff over the past five years?"

So tell me which Ohio university has had a DECREASE in their enrollment the past five years? Elimination of Administrative Positions? You realize that in most private business' and the Feds that these are already a thing of the past, right? Ever heard of MS Office there at the state/county level?

Checkmate? Hardly Calmer, re-read the first article posted. The NCAA has already tabled the $2000 payment and the multi-year scholarship edict has already been challenged. My positions, to use a "Sheenism" are "Winning." Life is a little more complicated than a chess game.

Maybe it is fun to waste other people's $$$ to most of you, Shadow excluded, but in the end our children will pay for our waste if unchecked.
 
Interesting viewpoints

"Never argue with idiots. They bring you down to their level, and beat you with experience."

I'll let the gallery ponder who qualifies...:clap:
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top