Cost of attendance

[Ta town]

http://espn.go.com/college-sports/story/_/id/12185230/power-5-conferences-pass-cost-attendance-measure-ncaa-autonomy-begins

So is the valley going to let each school decide and if not is WSU going to gtfo?

[Rosewood]

Without football WSU will never get into a power 5 conference so we just have to deal with being 2nd class citizens.

[Ta town]

Without football WSU will never get into a power 5 conference so we just have to deal with being 2nd class citizens.

What does football have to do with paying the players what amounts to 2-4 k in stipends a semester?

What I want to know is the valley going to let each school decide. I recall Sexton a few years ago when this subject was first floated basically saying the would want to pay.

[ShauXTyme]

You, sir, can continue your life as a "second-class citizen." I, however, will continue to live my Shocker-life in a very First-class way, and love every minute of it.

[ShockTalk]

Group of Five and other non-football playing Division I conferences can opt to enact the proposals passed Saturday as early as next fall.

This sounds like conferences like the Big East, A-10, and WAC can opt in, conferences like MWC, AAC, C-USA, and Sun Belt cannot. The article also does not make any distinction between D-I A and D-I AA. Not sure where the Valley would fit in as their "football" is not a conference sport. Does anyone know the actual wording and is it different?

[Shock Therapy]

Group of Five and other non-football playing Division I conferences can opt to enact the proposals passed Saturday as early as next fall.

This sounds like conferences like the Big East, A-10, and WAC can opt in, conferences like MWC, AAC, C-USA, and Sun Belt cannot. The article also does not make any distinction between D-I A and D-I AA. Not sure where the Valley would fit in as their "football" is not a conference sport. Does anyone know the actual wording and is it different?

The group of five refers to the non power 5 FBS conferences. So the MWC, CUSA and AAC are all free to adopt the new measures. It's confusing, but this is how "group of five" has been used in the media.

[Shock Therapy]

What's interesting is that this makes it sound like conferences that sponsor D1 basketball, but sponsor football at the FCS level or below are not allowed to adopt the new stipend. Which would affect more than half of D1 basketball teams. This is gonna be interesting.

[Rocky Mountain Shock]

The wording is confusing. It should say all non P5 conferences can opt to enact the stipend as early as next fall. Whether a conference plays I-A or I-AA football has nothing to do with it.

[choida]

You, sir, can continue your life as a "second-class citizen." I, however, will continue to live my Shocker-life in a very First-class way, and love every minute of it.

Preach brotha... We take back seat to know one... Respect all all programs that play us..so ku don't count cuz they don't have the balls to play us

[Dave Stalwart]

Question. If it is set as a standardized amount that isn't terribly high, and basically all schools adopt it because they pretty much have to, how will his create an edge for anyone in particular?

I guess some schools wont want to do it, but where do we really expect that line of separation to be? Arent we really just taking about the lowest of the low D-1 programs that won't want to do it? Who are we really talking about... I fully expect the MVC to participate completely in basketball.
Is it just going to turn into a thing that affects football since there are too many players on each team to afford the stipend?

Maybe I'm looking at it all wrong, but the fact that it is a controlled amount and the fact that it is a pretty small amount makes me think it's going to be pretty anti climactic except that now all these impoverished, homeless D-1 superstars will now be able to finally get some food to eat and a roof over their heads :)

[Aargh]

Another item:

"...prevent schools from removing scholarships based on athletic performance."

That would make it illegal to cut players who don't perform up to expectations. I have no clue how that can possibly be enforced. Did a player leave a program because he wanted to play somehwere else, wanted to be closer to home, decided he no longer wanted to participate in college athletcs, or did the coach not like the performance and then did not renew a scholarship?

That sounds like a "we'll make it sound good by putting something in there that we have no intention of enforcing".

[jdshock]

Another item:

"...prevent schools from removing scholarships based on athletic performance."

That would make it illegal to cut players who don't perform up to expectations. I have no clue how that can possibly be enforced. Did a player leave a program because he wanted to play somehwere else, wanted to be closer to home, decided he no longer wanted to participate in college athletcs, or did the coach not like the performance and then did not renew a scholarship?

That sounds like a "we'll make it sound good by putting something in there that we have no intention of enforcing".

It might not be enforced, but it probably wouldn't be too hard to enforce. It'd just be like any contract. If the player finds another team willing to pay, the team is off the hook. If the player does not find another team, they'd have to pay.

It's probably silly to go too into depth about less than a sentence, but I imagine that is how it would work.

[im4wsu]

It might not be enforced, but it probably wouldn't be too hard to enforce. It'd just be like any contract. If the player finds another team willing to pay, the team is off the hook. If the player does not find another team, they'd have to pay.

It's probably silly to go too into depth about less than a sentence, but I imagine that is how it would work.

Obviously it has to be tied to performance in the classroom, too, so some less-than-reputable institutions could work the system the opposite of what they do for stars to keep them eligible, just lower the grade slightly to make it difficult to remain eligible.

[AndShock]

Another item:

"...prevent schools from removing scholarships based on athletic performance."

That would make it illegal to cut players who don't perform up to expectations. I have no clue how that can possibly be enforced. Did a player leave a program because he wanted to play somehwere else, wanted to be closer to home, decided he no longer wanted to participate in college athletcs, or did the coach not like the performance and then did not renew a scholarship?

That sounds like a "we'll make it sound good by putting something in there that we have no intention of enforcing".

I'm guessing players will still be able to get cut from a team but the school will be forced to honor the scholarship until graduation, with the scholarship not counting against any limits.

[Shock Therapy]

Question. If it is set as a standardized amount that isn't terribly high, and basically all schools adopt it because they pretty much have to, how will his create an edge for anyone in particular?

I guess some schools wont want to do it, but where do we really expect that line of separation to be? Arent we really just taking about the lowest of the low D-1 programs that won't want to do it? Who are we really talking about... I fully expect the MVC to participate completely in basketball.
Is it just going to turn into a thing that affects football since there are too many players on each team to afford the stipend?

Maybe I'm looking at it all wrong, but the fact that it is a controlled amount and the fact that it is a pretty small amount makes me think it's going to be pretty anti climactic except that now all these impoverished, homeless D-1 superstars will now be able to finally get some food to eat and a roof over their heads :)

First, most schools already lose money on athletics and can't afford it. Many of the valley schools have already gone on record as being in that group. Second, it's not a standardized amount. Not in the sense that your talking about at least. It will be based on a formula provided by the federal government that schools use to calculate cost of attendance beyond tuition. It's meant to be used to advertise the true cost of attendance at a school which can vary wildly from school to school. I don't have a problem with it, but you better believe that there will be schools that attempt to manipulate the formula or apply it incorrectly for their own gain.