Thursday, August 20, 2015

More Cost of Attendence details and what it means

CBS put out a huge article with survey results on the how the various FBS schools plan to pay players under the new Cost of Attendance program. Long story short, all the Power 5 are paying players and most of the non-power 5 will pay too. But even as the system changes, the whole Cost of Attendance program still leaves so much up to the schools and lacks any consistent rule or calculations. And BC is still caught between trying to do what's right financially, competitively and upholds the school's values.

If you remember, BC voted against paying players when the issue first came to a vote. At the time we all recognized it as a protest vote. But even now as BC rolls out its plan, it remains clear we are doing so begrudgingly. Look at how BC is complicating its own process:

Boston College, the only Power Five school to vote against COA last January, will hand out new scholarship money. BC said it's providing $1,250 for miscellaneous expenses plus an unspecified travel allowance if the player is from outside New England. Partial-scholarship athletes on a percentage scholarship will receive the percentage of their dominator, and athletes on a dollar-figured scholarship will receive the dollar amount. Boston College declined to say how much money it's budgeting.

Imagine explaining that policy to recruits.

This can't last. Not just at BC. But everywhere. Even though the stipends/payments are relatively low, the disparity between schools will be exploited in recruiting.

I understand why BC structured the pay this way. But I think they are going to up their budgets shortly to keep up with our rivals. I also think BC should lead the charge to bring uniformity so that we can continue to compete.


Big Jack Krack said...

Some schools pay $4K more than BC. Yes, sadly - I think that is an issue.

Our players seem to genuinely want to be at BC, but still - $ might poison the well during recruiting in the future.

This stinks.

Hoib said...

The rules need to be uniform. Surprised they weren't from the get go. Location c.o.l., and athlete's family distance from home being the only allowance for differences. BC should quit griping, if you take the TV money you have to go along w/ the program. The school is trying to be a little bit pregnant IMO.

GP11 said...

This will definitely be a factor. For athletes and non-athletes alike, the "value" of your BC education is much more appreciated after graduation, let alone before even stepping foot on campus. The scholarship value is the same for every school... free. Free is free so having having an extra $4k in your pocket each year is a big deal for any 18 year old and will negatively affect recruiting... particularly if our main competition among similar academic institutions (Duke, Northwestern, Stanford, etc) are paying more. A standard $ amount would be a great start to evening this out.

Knucklehead said...

Are players getting paid now? What the FUCK?

Knucklehead said...

Seriously, got called away for a bit. I personally value education and have a good one. Education, however, does not mean shit if you do not finish your degree. If you do finish your degree but cannot produce in the work place or contribute respectfully to society it is absolutely fucking meaningless to have a degree from anywhere, Boston College or the-like.

So the idea that a Boston College degree has "value" is correct only on an individual basis. A football recruit who graduates and can contribute to society positively will do as well with a degree from Troy State as one with a degree from Boston College. If you study and learn Finance at Troy State and can do NPV and ROI and Forecasting for an employer you don't have less value than someone from BC who can do the same thing.

It is the individual and their talents who makes a Boston College degree valuable not the Boston College degree that makes the person valuable.

Big Jack Krack said...

At Boston (College), we pronounce the words the way they are spelled. :-)

So said JFK himself.

We are much better at networking into executive management as a result.