Originally posted by Fightingscot82
View Post
Announcement
Collapse
No announcement yet.
PASSHE Institutions Merging
Collapse
Support The Site!
Collapse
X
-
-
Originally posted by complaint_hopeful View Post
Honestly, it's a 450 page document, but I think there are massive details missing. It's really a very high level 10000 foot view document. I doubt the NCAA could read that and decipher what the impact would be.
Some of the BOG members during the vote said something like 'Think about the What not the How.' That document just doesn't have a lot of detail on aspects of this.
We're all looking at this logically. A lot of these organizations have beuracracy too.
Leave a comment:
-
Originally posted by iupgroundhog View Post
The model also assumes that those enrollees based on sports participation could not be replaced by other tuition-paying students. Unfortunately, at these schools, that appears to be the case.
If any of us has been on a campus when a team was cut you know what happens. When I was a student at Edinboro, they cut baseball & tennis. A handful of players stuck around because they were close to graduating or had a girlfriend there. One of my fraternity brothers was on the tennis team. He had two years left so he transferred to West Chester.
Leave a comment:
-
Originally posted by complaint_hopeful View Post
Literally EVERY public comment in the Zoom sessions was against this but 1 and the board voted unanimously to approve this.
Had they presented this and the NCAA said - No, please change these 4 things...I doubt that would have changed anything. This was getting full approval from the start.
I think Middle States is their main concern. And then, they'll work through the NCAA stuff because there is a financial benefit. If there was no financial benefit, they would get rid of some sports.
Leave a comment:
-
Originally posted by iupgroundhog View Post
Ok, well a law has been put in place by the PA legislature enabling this process. The BOG has approved a plan that covered something like 450 pages. Tell me, do you think there is not enough info to get a ruling from the NCAA?
Some of the BOG members during the vote said something like 'Think about the What not the How.' That document just doesn't have a lot of detail on aspects of this.
We're all looking at this logically. A lot of these organizations have beuracracy too.
Leave a comment:
-
Originally posted by iupgroundhog View Post
The model also assumes that those enrollees based on sports participation could not be replaced by other tuition-paying students. Unfortunately, at these schools, that appears to be the case.
Leave a comment:
-
Originally posted by complaint_hopeful View Post
The NCAA doesn't make preliminary statements. You submit the paperwork and they render a decision at one of their meetings. Now that decision may include things that you need to change to be compliant.
Now the big question is if the paperwork has been submitted.
Leave a comment:
-
Originally posted by iupgroundhog View Post
Yes. I understand the current situation. I also believe that anything can be negotiated. I do not believe for a second that this could not have been presented to the NCAA stating that we need an answer based on what we have in order to move forward.
Of course, there are details to be worked out for consolidation. However, there is enough structure already in place for the NCAA to communicate yay or nay. I believe that. I believe Greenstein did not try hard enough. Or, that he knows the answer is going to derail his plans.
Had they presented this and the NCAA said - No, please change these 4 things...I doubt that would have changed anything. This was getting full approval from the start.
I think Middle States is their main concern. And then, they'll work through the NCAA stuff because there is a financial benefit. If there was no financial benefit, they would get rid of some sports.
Leave a comment:
-
Originally posted by Fightingscot82 View Post
The model assumes that most of the athletes are only attending the school because of the sport. The basic ROI model is net tuition for players on the roster minus operating expenses (including coaches salaries). For PASSHE schools, athletic scholarships are externally funded so they don't affect revenue or expenses.
So for football, if you have 90 players at an average cost of $22k that's about $1.9MM. At Clarion, football expenses are a little north of $800k. So if Clarion cuts football to cut $800k in expenses, it can be assumed they will unintentionally also lose $1.9MM in revenue.
Leave a comment:
-
Originally posted by iupgroundhog View Post
I believe their cost/revenue calculation only applies in the short-term (In this case, 2-4 years). What is missed by the argument is that, over time, the mission of the schools is going to change. They are going to move away from the traditional 4-year college model that we have grown up with and morph into something different. Let's call that the intermediate-term and it is likely 5-10 years. In the intermediate-term, the cost savings being discussed gets overridden by more global changes to the schools. Yes, losing enrollment by dropping sports might be a relevant consideration now but it won't be very soon.
Average time to complete a bachelor's degree isn't a standard metric nor is it talked about. I think if it were, people would see the connection between "graduation rates" and the family income of the students enrolled.
Leave a comment:
-
Originally posted by WarriorVoice View Post
The NCCA plays wait and see. They will rule on the plan once the plan is finalized and implemented. If they don't approve, they'll give the schools a year to fix it to their liking.
Of course, there are details to be worked out for consolidation. However, there is enough structure already in place for the NCAA to communicate yay or nay. I believe that. I believe Greenstein did not try hard enough. Or, that he knows the answer is going to derail his plans.
Leave a comment:
-
Originally posted by iupgroundhog View Post
I believe their cost/revenue calculation only applies in the short-term (In this case, 2-4 years). What is missed by the argument is that, over time, the mission of the schools is going to change. They are going to move away from the traditional 4-year college model that we have grown up with and morph into something different. Let's call that the intermediate-term and it is likely 5-10 years. In the intermediate-term, the cost savings being discussed gets overridden by more global changes to the schools. Yes, losing enrollment by dropping sports might be a relevant consideration now but it won't be very soon.
I think at a certain point, people will forget that these were individual schools. A lot of the 'losing the mission' talk is because people compare how they do things now. Really, that's not sustainable. Probably about 3-4 PASSHE schools shouldn't exist. They're out of reserves and losing money badly.
I'm like 99% sure that the model these triads are using is going to be applied across most of PASSHE. They're going to start sharing classes among all schools. There will be less Faculty. Now will this be in 2 years or 10 years? I don't know that side. And online will be a key in that.
Leave a comment:
-
Originally posted by Fightingscot82 View PostAlong with all of this, in hindsight, I think Cheyney cutting athletics was the wrong decision and some folks I've talked to familiar with PASSHE have agreed. Cheyney had to make significant cuts and from a P/L sheet athletics looks like a good target. But at a school with enrollment & retention problems, they also gave 250 students a reason to take their tuition elsewhere. Then Aaron Walton was forced to make even more cuts. I guess their budget is balanced now but not having NCAA athletics makes Cheyney an even less desirable choice.
Leave a comment:
-
Originally posted by iupgroundhog View Post
I guess it's possible and anything can happen but IMO a "distributed " athletics program doesn't make sense for schools that are all at least 1 hour drive from each other. First, it sharply reduces the "enrollment" factor these guys are talking about, thereby defeating the purpose of keeping athletics in the first place. Second, the plan, by definition, creates academic specialty schools, with specific schools taking over specific academic areas. How do you match a student-athlete who wants to play volleyball (for ex.) at Lock Haven but whose academic specialty is offered primarily at Bloomsburg? The answer is "You don't." That student-athlete already enrolled at PSU-Berks or Miseracordia or somewhere else. I think a distributed system would be a half-baked idea. Maybe if the programs were different to begin with it could work. But they aren't. A couple of months ago I compared LH and Bloom athletics offerings, overall. They are almost identical. They are maybe one program off from each other. They have virtually the same list of men's and women's sports. Like you say, in football, it could work with LH moving to a non-NCAA program. That makes some sense only because of LH's lack of competitiveness in FB. Wrestling, LHU can remain D1 and Bloom drop to D2 (a possibility aside from all this). But what about Basketball? Who gets it? Big question. Then you have all of the other minor sports. Who gets them? Plus, many of those don't cost that much to operate, anyway.
The bottom line is there should be a preliminary statement from the NCAA. But there is nothing. Doesn't bode well. For Mr. Greenstein and the BOG sports has not been a priority and that is a huge mistake.
Now the big question is if the paperwork has been submitted.
Leave a comment:
-
Originally posted by WarriorVoice View Post
Do either of you have any numbers to show how cutting sports actually loses more money than it saves? I haven't found anything to back up that claim.
Essentially though, you have say a team with 12 players on it. Those kids are all paying tuition in one form or another. Even if they are on scholarship from fundraised money, the University gets that money. So say costs are $20k a year. $20k x 12 is $240k. You probably have a HC getting paid. Then you have an assistant. And travel and uniforms. I doubt that stuff adds up to $240k so you're making money. Say $50-100k profit. Now multiply that by a bunch of sports. And that's a sport with 12 players on the team.
Some sports have much larger rosters.
Leave a comment:
Ad3
Collapse
Leave a comment: