Moderators: peeker643, swerb, danwismar, furls
by Spin » Tue May 03, 2011 4:03 pm
by jb » Tue May 03, 2011 4:41 pm
by Spin » Wed May 04, 2011 9:58 am
jb wrote:Good move. These schools can't afford comprehensive D1 costs.I still think Jerry Dybzinski did more at the MLB level than any UA alums combined.
by jb » Wed May 04, 2011 10:06 am
Spin wrote:jb wrote:Good move. These schools can't afford comprehensive D1 costs.I still think Jerry Dybzinski did more at the MLB level than any UA alums combined. You forget the money is coming out of the student's pockets. Not yours.
And why is it mandatory that a team has to have major league prospects for it to be entertaining?
Instead of looking down on the MAC, enjoy it for what it is. Kids playing for the love of the game, entertaining to some.
by Spin » Wed May 04, 2011 11:50 am
jb wrote:Post me what you know of operational and capital state subsidy formulas for Ohio public universities an dthen I will give you a legitimate converation. I assure you that you have no idea what you are talking about on this one. Stick to schooling me on Akrin trivia.
And why is it mandatory that a team has to have major league prospects for it to be entertaining?What does this have to do with Ohio having too many residential large universities to serve a declining population struggling with budget defecits strained by bloated D 1 athletic budgets hemmorhaging red on programs that no one really cares about except for the heavily subsidzed participants?? Hey, I love Little League for what it is, too. I just don't want to pay for it without freedom of choice to do so.
And as for your sexist softball player remarks?
by jb » Wed May 04, 2011 12:12 pm
I'm not talking about how state colleges are funded, I'm talking about how college sports are funded.
by Erie Warrior » Wed May 04, 2011 3:14 pm
jb wrote:Know who went to KSU softball games? Parents and players' friends and girlfriends.
by Spin » Wed May 04, 2011 7:40 pm
jb wrote:One and the same at the vast majority of D1 schools, Spin, and ALL D2, D3 and NAIA instututions. It is just that non-schollie program can justify existance through enrollment revenue. NFW are athletic budgets self-sustaining ecept for the legacy institutions like tOSU with mega stadiums in mega conferences. The big myth is that iunmeasurable criteria such as fundraising propensity and visibility make up for the on account losses.State universities have two types of primary budgets, capital budget and operating budget. capital budgets are rarely paid directly by universities. The state issues bonds onto a market, and state taxpayers fund the bonds. I can, um, show you my 1040 to prove my status there. It' easy to read cause there's no vasiline on it. Operating budgets are funded through about 6 sources: student tuition and fees, state enrollment-based subsidy, state and federal financial aid funnelled through students, research grants, endowment draw, and last-dollar philanthopy. While subsidy has been on a steady decline since the early 80's, it and financial aid are still extremnely significant tax-payer sources. Again, that's me, boyo.
We can all have opinions about co-curricular programs, and five will get you ten you and I would probably agree on 90% of what is extraneous. But there are some that are at least related to academic program, mostly the arts you cite. The smple fact is that D1 athletics don;t have a GD thing to do with a student's education in any way, shape or form, other than maybe student trainers and staff who could intern elsewhere.
In the MAC men's football eats up more debt than about 4 women's athletic programs combined.
Like your article cites, if they had to break even, they'd all be at the chopping block. And all big-time athletes have negative sterotypes. Singling out softbllers is lame.
by Spin » Wed May 04, 2011 7:49 pm
by jb » Thu May 05, 2011 8:59 am
by exiledbuckeye » Thu May 05, 2011 2:35 pm
by furls » Thu May 05, 2011 4:24 pm
by Spin » Thu May 05, 2011 4:49 pm
jb wrote:Spn, you seem to think I have some sort of women's sports' bias or affinity. You couldn't be more wrong. Don't get me started on women's hoops. It's ugly.
You seem to think I hate on small time athletics. I don't. Been known to just stop on a walk and take in a LL inning for the fun of watching it & chillin'.
College scholarship athletics are all a huge waste other than self-supporting legacy programs.
Men's or women's. You should be irritated by all those fees. But I'm tellin' yah, programs gobbles up even more money, including state funds. Particularly from the standpoint of capital projects. You think student fees paid for all of Infocision?
This is a new era fiscally when it comes to public funds. There's just not enough caysh for all the stuff we're used to in a variety of aspects in our lives. technology evolves, activities and passtimes evolve, but public instututions remain inert and have hands out. They don't get it. But there's all thse vestiges that have lost meaning. Cut it all if it lack significant relevance AFAIC. Evolve.
Now tell me who invented the hamburger. Cheers.
by Spin » Thu May 05, 2011 4:52 pm
furls wrote:Textbook prices are the result of economy of scale. printing a book costs X dollars to print the first book and y dollars to print each additional book up to n number of books, so you get: Price = X/n + yas n goes up price per unit goes down. There is not much demand for books like "The Art of Finite and Infinte Expansions" because there are not that many people worldwide studying advanced combinatorics, so that book is going to be expensive. Now that is not to say that the publishers aren't building in huge margins and capitalizing by releasing a new edition every two years to screw the used book market up, but the basic economics ensure that even if the publishers weren't money grubbing whores college books would be more expensive than supermarket romance novels.
by furls » Thu May 05, 2011 6:36 pm
by exiledbuckeye » Thu May 05, 2011 7:32 pm
Spin wrote:I tell my classmates, as soon as I graduate, I'm going to work on a textbook. If colleges use it, I'll have it made. Then, every year or two, I'll add some illustrations, maybe a chapter, and boom, new addition. Those poor bastards can't sell back their book now. So every new student has to buy my new addition.Screw nursing, the money is in writing medical text...
by dmiles » Thu May 05, 2011 8:51 pm
by furls » Thu May 05, 2011 10:43 pm
by jb » Fri May 06, 2011 9:33 am
Spin wrote:Although I don't have the same bias toward volleyball.
The same as a hundred other scholarships and loan forgivenesses. The only differene is a athletic scholarship doesn't require X number of credit hours or Y.Y GPA.Which they should.
That, from what I understand, was cheaper than rebuilding the Rubber Bowl, which was built on a spring and due for another foundation replacement. And it had no lockers (just nails on the wall), no hot water. There's also classroom space that replaced rooms in Memorial Hall. And they got sponsors, which they could never do in the RB. Now if they just put together a team to play there.
Just do it evenly.
by Spin » Fri May 06, 2011 10:32 am
jb wrote:That, from what I understand, was cheaper than rebuilding the Rubber Bowl, which was built on a spring and due for another foundation replacement. And it had no lockers (just nails on the wall), no hot water. There's also classroom space that replaced rooms in Memorial Hall. And they got sponsors, which they could never do in the RB. Now if they just put together a team to play there. Not what I'm getting at. The point is that you seemed to be hanging onto a the misguided notion that athletic funding is an intramural issue at state schools and students' fees foot the bill. That's just not the case. The taxpayers of Ohio are helping support about 7 mediocre CFB programs no one would miss if they fell of the earth tomorrow except about 20,000 hard core booster types. Akron will never come close to filling Infocision on a regular basis any more than Toledo, Kent, BG, Miami, OU or YSU do on a regular basis (not counting a handful of freak or novelty years at any of these places) .No one cares enough. It's over saturation and overkill. And the notion that "2,000 for a home post season tourney" CSU actively contemplates D 1 football makes me vomit in my mouth as a taxpayer.
Works for me.Cut it all but at major programs that self-support.
by Spin » Fri May 06, 2011 10:37 am
furls wrote:He kind of lost the love for baseball
by dmiles » Fri May 06, 2011 1:36 pm
Spin wrote:furls wrote:He kind of lost the love for baseball That seems like a nationwide epidemic. For a number of reasons.
by furls » Fri May 06, 2011 5:52 pm
by Spin » Fri May 06, 2011 7:12 pm
furls wrote:He just didn't want to put the work into baseball anymore. To be honest, I may have some blame in this because we basically stopped watching baseball at home once Sabathia and Lee got traded. I have basically bailed on baseball, having no shot to keep my favorite players sucks. Being a tribe fan is just intentionally setting yourself up for heartbreak every time the team has a good player. I think he was also looking for a more active sport and commented on multiple occasions that it was boring, he started at CF last year so he was still a good player, just not an interested one.
by furls » Fri May 06, 2011 7:26 pm
by dmiles » Sat May 07, 2011 1:24 am
by Spin » Sat May 07, 2011 11:17 am
dmiles wrote:Spin I haven't been in Ohio now in quite a while and I just can't imagine with the crap weather that baseball is very big whereas it was freaking huge in SoCal.
Return to College Sports Arena
Users browsing this forum: Exabot [Bot] and 2 guests