Man look at all that government support that ODU doesn't get any of.

(07-23-2019 09:18 AM)EagNBran Wrote:  Are you implying that the CoL in Denton is less burdensome than Hattiesburg?

If cost of living is lower in Hattiesburg then $25 gets you more than $25 in Denton, right?

I glanced through the thread and clearly many people think what goes for one university, in one state, applies to all. I am glad to see there are others attempting to explain that isn't the case.

It is always pretty complex. In NC, state funds are not used for athletics. However, a coach's base salary is paid by the state as they are staff, and additional money comes to them from athletics. Athletic scholarships are not funded with state money, and neither are facilities, equipment, operating expenses, etc. This policy helps NC keep tuition costs low, and then of course our schools charge students an athletics fee which bumps it right back up. It is a money game where only two things seem to really matter--total amount students must pay the school, and total amount of the athletic department budget. Parsing out the sources of the money is an apples and oranges exercise at best.

I will say that in NC the total cost to a student is pretty low. Our generous taxpayers see to that.

Charlotte's athletics budget is very competitive in C-USA, and it grows every year. Fortunately for the 49ers, we are at 30k students, and growing towards 45k as quickly as we can build new buildings. That will give us a 50% increase in student fees over the next 6-8 years, and because student fees here are a significant portion of our overall athletics budget we will be able to increase what we spend by a like percentage. Because athletic costs do not correlate with student growth, and because our scholarships are all already fully funded, the increase will allow us to spend on quality (better salaries, marketing, and facilities). We have a pretty good plan in place for our program if we can just figure out how to win!

clt says Charlotte had another increase in giving this year as well

(07-22-2019 11:21 AM)LaTechBanjo Wrote:  

(07-21-2019 12:48 PM)FriscoDawg Wrote:  

(07-20-2019 02:27 PM)eager eagle Wrote:  

(07-20-2019 05:43 AM)FriscoDawg Wrote:  

(07-18-2019 02:04 PM)LaTechBanjo Wrote:  It's a complicated story that changed within the last 10 years.

Schools used to be prohibited from this. Now, the school can have a "self-assessed" student fee for athletics, but this change only came about through interpretation from the Regents, and not an actual change in state law.

The student government authority has to bring the fee up for a vote and get a majority of students to pass it.

There are hard dollar caps for state money allowed to be transferred to athletics that are imposed by the State Board of Regents on each university. Those are determined by formula based on enrollment and NCAA membership classification. In additional all tuition covered by athletic scholarships is fully recoverable as part of the allowed state transfer.

Under the old rule interpretation, all student athletics fees charged to go directly to the annual athletics budget reduced the amount of money dollar for dollar that could be transferred directly to athletics from state money. The rationale behind that is that any money paid in tuition and fees by students becomes state money as soon as it is paid in. That made it self-defeating to even charge student athletic fees that would go toward the yearly athletics budget.

Student athletic fees voted on by students are now exempted from the dollar-for-dollar subtraction from the formula calculated amount. Athletic fees imposed without student body approval are still subject to subtraction from the formula amount.

As an aside, NCAA agreed-upon procedures reporting requirements have always limited the amount of revenue that should be reported each year to amounts included in the annual athletics budget. Any revenue and expenses related to capital projects is reported separately from annual revenue and expenses on the NCAA reports. Louisiana's rules are consistent with this NCAA reporting requirement in that there is no restriction on student fees imposed for capital projects related to athletics since those are not to be included in the annual athletics budget figures.

A simple answer to the question about La Tech student athletic fees is the state (Regents) disallowed those until 3-4yr ago. The rule was changed where a school CAN charge a fee now however ONLY if the proposal is voted on and approved by the students. La Tech students have not voted on one, yes or no, therefore are charged no athletic fees.

That simple answer by EE incorrectly states how the old rules worked.

Student fees were allowed by the Board of Regents prior to 3-4 years ago. But it didn't matter whether they were approved by the student body or not. Those collected student fees reduced the allowed transfer of other university state money to athletics dollar-for-dollar as I stated before. The Board of Regents rule change was only to exempt student body-approved fee collections from the dollar-for dollar reduction from the calculated formula maximum amounts.

I think that while you're stating it accurately, EE is functionally correct in the instance of Tech by virtue of the fact that Tech always transfers the maximum amount of institutional support as per the cap you describe.

The rule change allows a self-assessed student fee to fund above and beyond the institutional transfer limit, as ULL does.

While it is a simplification, it's not functionally inaccurate in the case of Tech. Prior to the rule change,student fees of any kind could not be used to fund athletics ABOVE the institutional transfer limit. Now they can if they are self assessed.

EE is not "functionally correct" when inaccurately stating that Tech always transfers the maximum possible amount of direct institutional support.

In the most recent 2017-2018 NCAA report, Tech transferred $9,172,689. That amount includes both the base support amount calculated by formula plus the 100% reimbursement for scholarships that has always been allowed.

The Board of Regents maximum base transfer amount listed for Tech in 2017-2018 was $5,842,613. Also listed was the budgeted transfer amount of only $3,142,640, under 54% of the maximum allowed.

According to tuition and fee figures on the Regents' website, Tech's annual in-state tuition and fees for 2017-2018 were just over $19,000. According to collegefactual.com, Tech has 366 student athletes. If you figure just 317.5 FTE scholarships at $19,000 each, that's $6,032,500. Add in the budgeted base transfer number and that adds up to $9,175,140, more than the actual transfer was.

Drop the FTE scholarship number down to 300 ($5,700,00 total), and if Tech had transferred the full allowed base amount for 2017-2018 the total transfer would have been over $11.5 million. That's almost $2.4 million more than the actual transfer amount.

(07-23-2019 09:43 PM)FriscoDawg Wrote:  

(07-22-2019 11:21 AM)LaTechBanjo Wrote:  

(07-21-2019 12:48 PM)FriscoDawg Wrote:  

(07-20-2019 02:27 PM)eager eagle Wrote:  

(07-20-2019 05:43 AM)FriscoDawg Wrote:  There are hard dollar caps for state money allowed to be transferred to athletics that are imposed by the State Board of Regents on each university. Those are determined by formula based on enrollment and NCAA membership classification. In additional all tuition covered by athletic scholarships is fully recoverable as part of the allowed state transfer.

Under the old rule interpretation, all student athletics fees charged to go directly to the annual athletics budget reduced the amount of money dollar for dollar that could be transferred directly to athletics from state money. The rationale behind that is that any money paid in tuition and fees by students becomes state money as soon as it is paid in. That made it self-defeating to even charge student athletic fees that would go toward the yearly athletics budget.

Student athletic fees voted on by students are now exempted from the dollar-for-dollar subtraction from the formula calculated amount. Athletic fees imposed without student body approval are still subject to subtraction from the formula amount.

As an aside, NCAA agreed-upon procedures reporting requirements have always limited the amount of revenue that should be reported each year to amounts included in the annual athletics budget. Any revenue and expenses related to capital projects is reported separately from annual revenue and expenses on the NCAA reports. Louisiana's rules are consistent with this NCAA reporting requirement in that there is no restriction on student fees imposed for capital projects related to athletics since those are not to be included in the annual athletics budget figures.

A simple answer to the question about La Tech student athletic fees is the state (Regents) disallowed those until 3-4yr ago. The rule was changed where a school CAN charge a fee now however ONLY if the proposal is voted on and approved by the students. La Tech students have not voted on one, yes or no, therefore are charged no athletic fees.

That simple answer by EE incorrectly states how the old rules worked.

Student fees were allowed by the Board of Regents prior to 3-4 years ago. But it didn't matter whether they were approved by the student body or not. Those collected student fees reduced the allowed transfer of other university state money to athletics dollar-for-dollar as I stated before. The Board of Regents rule change was only to exempt student body-approved fee collections from the dollar-for dollar reduction from the calculated formula maximum amounts.

I think that while you're stating it accurately, EE is functionally correct in the instance of Tech by virtue of the fact that Tech always transfers the maximum amount of institutional support as per the cap you describe.

The rule change allows a self-assessed student fee to fund above and beyond the institutional transfer limit, as ULL does.

While it is a simplification, it's not functionally inaccurate in the case of Tech. Prior to the rule change,student fees of any kind could not be used to fund athletics ABOVE the institutional transfer limit. Now they can if they are self assessed.

EE is not "functionally correct" when inaccurately stating that Tech always transfers the maximum possible amount of direct institutional support.

In the most recent 2017-2018 NCAA report, Tech transferred $9,172,689. That amount includes both the base support amount calculated by formula plus the 100% reimbursement for scholarships that has always been allowed.

The Board of Regents maximum base transfer amount listed for Tech in 2017-2018 was $5,842,613. Also listed was the budgeted transfer amount of only $3,142,640, under 54% of the maximum allowed.

According to tuition and fee figures on the Regents' website, Tech's annual in-state tuition and fees for 2017-2018 were just over $19,000. According to collegefactual.com, Tech has 366 student athletes. If you figure just 317.5 FTE scholarships at $19,000 each, that's $6,032,500. Add in the budgeted base transfer number and that adds up to $9,175,140, more than the actual transfer was.

Drop the FTE scholarship number down to 300 ($5,700,00 total), and if Tech had transferred the full allowed base amount for 2017-2018 the total transfer would have been over $11.5 million. That's almost $2.4 million more than the actual transfer amount.

For 2018: 9,172,689 total support. The transfer limit is $6,342,613 (you have to include the 500k gender equity amount above the stated max). This is a 2.830M difference.

2.83M is the true value of the scholarship waivers. There's no need to go calculate FTE or use collegefactual. The annual amount of scholarship waivers is typically included in the LLA agreed upon procedures report, but was actually omitted in the 2018FY report. It was listed as 2.9M in the 2017 report.

For year ending 2017 (last page), the report states that 2.9M is the total value of the waivers: https://www.lla.la.gov/PublicReports.nsf...0179B7.pdf

The numbers for 2017 Actual Direct Inst. Support - $8,657,387 incl. $2.9M of student aid waivers. Difference is $5,757,387.

The maximum allowed for that year was $6,091,362 including the gender equity amount. https://regents.la.gov/wp-content/upload...X_FY17.pdf

The last year reported as actual amounts by the regents was in FY2015: https://regents.la.gov/wp-content/upload...X_FY15.pdf - and tech transferred $4,857,640 vs. the maximum $5,342,640 including gender equity. I'd argue that we're essentially transferring the maximum amount. (10% shy in 2015)

This thread is like watching Republicans and Democrats argue over which administration is "really" responsible for the current state of the economy.

(07-24-2019 09:02 AM)LaTechBanjo Wrote:  

(07-23-2019 09:43 PM)FriscoDawg Wrote:  

(07-22-2019 11:21 AM)LaTechBanjo Wrote:  

(07-21-2019 12:48 PM)FriscoDawg Wrote:  

(07-20-2019 02:27 PM)eager eagle Wrote:  A simple answer to the question about La Tech student athletic fees is the state (Regents) disallowed those until 3-4yr ago. The rule was changed where a school CAN charge a fee now however ONLY if the proposal is voted on and approved by the students. La Tech students have not voted on one, yes or no, therefore are charged no athletic fees.

That simple answer by EE incorrectly states how the old rules worked.

Student fees were allowed by the Board of Regents prior to 3-4 years ago. But it didn't matter whether they were approved by the student body or not. Those collected student fees reduced the allowed transfer of other university state money to athletics dollar-for-dollar as I stated before. The Board of Regents rule change was only to exempt student body-approved fee collections from the dollar-for dollar reduction from the calculated formula maximum amounts.

I think that while you're stating it accurately, EE is functionally correct in the instance of Tech by virtue of the fact that Tech always transfers the maximum amount of institutional support as per the cap you describe.

The rule change allows a self-assessed student fee to fund above and beyond the institutional transfer limit, as ULL does.

While it is a simplification, it's not functionally inaccurate in the case of Tech. Prior to the rule change,student fees of any kind could not be used to fund athletics ABOVE the institutional transfer limit. Now they can if they are self assessed.

EE is not "functionally correct" when inaccurately stating that Tech always transfers the maximum possible amount of direct institutional support.

In the most recent 2017-2018 NCAA report, Tech transferred $9,172,689. That amount includes both the base support amount calculated by formula plus the 100% reimbursement for scholarships that has always been allowed.

The Board of Regents maximum base transfer amount listed for Tech in 2017-2018 was $5,842,613. Also listed was the budgeted transfer amount of only $3,142,640, under 54% of the maximum allowed.

According to tuition and fee figures on the Regents' website, Tech's annual in-state tuition and fees for 2017-2018 were just over $19,000. According to collegefactual.com, Tech has 366 student athletes. If you figure just 317.5 FTE scholarships at $19,000 each, that's $6,032,500. Add in the budgeted base transfer number and that adds up to $9,175,140, more than the actual transfer was.

Drop the FTE scholarship number down to 300 ($5,700,00 total), and if Tech had transferred the full allowed base amount for 2017-2018 the total transfer would have been over $11.5 million. That's almost $2.4 million more than the actual transfer amount.

For 2018: 9,172,689 total support. The transfer limit is $6,342,613 (you have to include the 500k gender equity amount above the stated max). This is a 2.830M difference.

2.83M is the true value of the scholarship waivers. There's no need to go calculate FTE or use collegefactual. The annual amount of scholarship waivers is typically included in the LLA agreed upon procedures report, but was actually omitted in the 2018FY report. It was listed as 2.9M in the 2017 report.

For year ending 2017 (last page), the report states that 2.9M is the total value of the waivers: https://www.lla.la.gov/PublicReports.nsf...0179B7.pdf

The numbers for 2017 Actual Direct Inst. Support - $8,657,387 incl. $2.9M of student aid waivers. Difference is $5,757,387.

The maximum allowed for that year was $6,091,362 including the gender equity amount. https://regents.la.gov/wp-content/upload...X_FY17.pdf

The last year reported as actual amounts by the regents was in FY2015: https://regents.la.gov/wp-content/upload...X_FY15.pdf - and tech transferred $4,857,640 vs. the maximum $5,342,640 including gender equity. I'd argue that we're essentially transferring the maximum amount. (10% shy in 2015)

The accusation was that "Tech always transfers the maximum amount of institutional support". Even 10% under the maximum for 2016-2017 is still NOT the maximum. My figures were all for 2017-2018, not for 2016-2017, and I stand by them.

The flaw in the data set at the beginning of this thread is that everything is on a percentage of each University's budget. If everyone's budget were the same then those percentages would matter for comparison. However, since the budgets vary widely how do you compare 5% in ticket sales at one school versus 8% at another school. The 5% may actually be a higher dollar value than the 8%. That said trying to compare and make sense of this is a futile effort.

e]

[/quote]That simple answer by EE incorrectly states how the old rules worked.

Student fees were allowed by the Board of Regents prior to 3-4 years ago. But it didn't matter whether they were approved by the student body or not. Those collected student fees reduced the allowed transfer of other university state money to athletics dollar-for-dollar as I stated before. The Board of Regents rule change was only to exempt student body-approved fee collections from the dollar-for dollar reduction from the calculated formula maximum amounts.
[/quote]

I think that while you're stating it accurately, EE is functionally correct in the instance of Tech by virtue of the fact that Tech always transfers the maximum amount of institutional support as per the cap you describe.

The rule change allows a self-assessed student fee to fund above and beyond the institutional transfer limit, as ULL does.

While it is a simplification, it's not functionally inaccurate in the case of Tech. Prior to the rule change,student fees of any kind could not be used to fund athletics ABOVE the institutional transfer limit. Now they can if they are self assessed.
[/quote]EE is not "functionally correct" when inaccurately stating that Tech always transfers the maximum possible amount of direct institutional support.

In the most recent 2017-2018 NCAA report, Tech transferred $9,172,689. That amount includes both the base support amount calculated by formula plus the 100% reimbursement for scholarships that has always been allowed.

The Board of Regents maximum base transfer amount listed for Tech in 2017-2018 was $5,842,613. Also listed was the budgeted transfer amount of only $3,142,640, under 54% of the maximum allowed.

According to tuition and fee figures on the Regents' website, Tech's annual in-state tuition and fees for 2017-2018 were just over $19,000. According to collegefactual.com, Tech has 366 student athletes. If you figure just 317.5 FTE scholarships at $19,000 each, that's $6,032,500. Add in the budgeted base transfer number and that adds up to $9,175,140, more than the actual transfer was.

Drop the FTE scholarship number down to 300 ($5,700,00 total), and if Tech had transferred the full allowed base amount for 2017-2018 the total transfer would have been over $11.5 million. That's almost $2.4 million more than the actual transfer amount.
[/quote]

EE, as usual, is misquoted. I never posted that Tech always transfers the maximum amount to athletics. Only thing I post is the actual figures, never commenting if it is more or less. Secondly, a lot is written here about the "old method or rule" in effect prior to present formula. The old rule, prior to 2014, was very simple in that each school in the UL system could transfer $1,000,000 plus the total cost of room, board, scholarships, etc plus about $250,000 for gender equity. There was no mention of a student athletic fee by anyone anywhere as none was ever collected thus none could ever be transferred.

(07-24-2019 07:43 PM)FriscoDawg Wrote:  

(07-24-2019 09:02 AM)LaTechBanjo Wrote:  

(07-23-2019 09:43 PM)FriscoDawg Wrote:  

(07-22-2019 11:21 AM)LaTechBanjo Wrote:  

(07-21-2019 12:48 PM)FriscoDawg Wrote:  That simple answer by EE incorrectly states how the old rules worked.

Student fees were allowed by the Board of Regents prior to 3-4 years ago. But it didn't matter whether they were approved by the student body or not. Those collected student fees reduced the allowed transfer of other university state money to athletics dollar-for-dollar as I stated before. The Board of Regents rule change was only to exempt student body-approved fee collections from the dollar-for dollar reduction from the calculated formula maximum amounts.

I think that while you're stating it accurately, EE is functionally correct in the instance of Tech by virtue of the fact that Tech always transfers the maximum amount of institutional support as per the cap you describe.

The rule change allows a self-assessed student fee to fund above and beyond the institutional transfer limit, as ULL does.

While it is a simplification, it's not functionally inaccurate in the case of Tech. Prior to the rule change,student fees of any kind could not be used to fund athletics ABOVE the institutional transfer limit. Now they can if they are self assessed.

EE is not "functionally correct" when inaccurately stating that Tech always transfers the maximum possible amount of direct institutional support.

In the most recent 2017-2018 NCAA report, Tech transferred $9,172,689. That amount includes both the base support amount calculated by formula plus the 100% reimbursement for scholarships that has always been allowed.

The Board of Regents maximum base transfer amount listed for Tech in 2017-2018 was $5,842,613. Also listed was the budgeted transfer amount of only $3,142,640, under 54% of the maximum allowed.

According to tuition and fee figures on the Regents' website, Tech's annual in-state tuition and fees for 2017-2018 were just over $19,000. According to collegefactual.com, Tech has 366 student athletes. If you figure just 317.5 FTE scholarships at $19,000 each, that's $6,032,500. Add in the budgeted base transfer number and that adds up to $9,175,140, more than the actual transfer was.

Drop the FTE scholarship number down to 300 ($5,700,00 total), and if Tech had transferred the full allowed base amount for 2017-2018 the total transfer would have been over $11.5 million. That's almost $2.4 million more than the actual transfer amount.

For 2018: 9,172,689 total support. The transfer limit is $6,342,613 (you have to include the 500k gender equity amount above the stated max). This is a 2.830M difference.

2.83M is the true value of the scholarship waivers. There's no need to go calculate FTE or use collegefactual. The annual amount of scholarship waivers is typically included in the LLA agreed upon procedures report, but was actually omitted in the 2018FY report. It was listed as 2.9M in the 2017 report.

For year ending 2017 (last page), the report states that 2.9M is the total value of the waivers: https://www.lla.la.gov/PublicReports.nsf...0179B7.pdf

The numbers for 2017 Actual Direct Inst. Support - $8,657,387 incl. $2.9M of student aid waivers. Difference is $5,757,387.

The maximum allowed for that year was $6,091,362 including the gender equity amount. https://regents.la.gov/wp-content/upload...X_FY17.pdf

The last year reported as actual amounts by the regents was in FY2015: https://regents.la.gov/wp-content/upload...X_FY15.pdf - and tech transferred $4,857,640 vs. the maximum $5,342,640 including gender equity. I'd argue that we're essentially transferring the maximum amount. (10% shy in 2015)

The accusation was that "Tech always transfers the maximum amount of institutional support". Even 10% under the maximum for 2016-2017 is still NOT the maximum. My figures were all for 2017-2018, not for 2016-2017, and I stand by them.

Fair enough. I posted FY17 and FY18.

Even if it is 90% of the maximum, I think we'd all agree that we'd need a student fee to really move the needle on the annual budget.

These are always informative