Mountain West?

[AZGrizFan]

Didn't Andrew Schmidt post on Twitter just a couple days ago that he had spoken with either Haslam or Bodnar and they confirmed that MWC was NOT happening?

 

[Hells bells]

Didn't Andrew Schmidt post on Twitter just a couple days ago that he had spoken with either Haslam or Bodnar and they confirmed that MWC was NOT happening?

I hope that is the case for both schools

 

[Griz til I die]

Nothing of major significance provided here.

 

[5280Griz]

Nothing of major significance provided here.

I haven’t heard anything from Tarleton State but he is correct that NDSU seems to be one of the most likely FCS programs to move up. There is significant interest in NDSU’s athletic department and fan base. Not everyone is on board, some do want to stay in FCS but there is a lot more interest in moving up coming from them than the Montana schools.

 

[CDAGRIZ]

And being in the big sky we cannot currently go past 63 as they voted not to allow increases after the house settlement. I don’t believe the MVFC capped their schools after the house settlement though I doubt any will be able to afford 85 much less 105.

Has anyone been able to confirm what an athletic scholarship costs UM in $USD out of pocket?

 

[ElrodGrizzly]

Has anyone been able to confirm what an athletic scholarship costs UM in $USD out of pocket?

No, because your point (or what I take to be the point you have been making with this question) is largely correct and unarguable. It costs the school nothing to have the student sit in the classroom and not pay tuition. Its not like we are over capacity with students like UM once was, so I doubt that offering a player the scholarship even takes a bed away from a student that would pay tuition for the ones that stay in the dorms.

Paying for their food would be one actual cash outlay, and if my understanding is right that we are able to now pay more of a full cost of attendance then there would be an actual cash outlay for housing, transportation, and books. It would be an amount of some significance, but I don't have any way of knowing what the University is paying out in that regard.

 

[CDAGRIZ]

No, because your point (or what I take to be the point you have been making with this question) is largely correct and unarguable. It costs the school nothing to have the student sit in the classroom and not pay tuition. Its not like we are over capacity with students like UM once was, so I doubt that offering a player the scholarship even takes a bed away from a student that would pay tuition for the ones that stay in the dorms.

Paying for their food would be one actual cash outlay, and if my understanding is right that we are able to now pay more of a full cost of attendance then there would be an actual cash outlay for housing, transportation, and books. It would be an amount of some significance, but I don't have any way of knowing what the University is paying out in that regard.

Got it, thanks. That's kind of what I was thinking. So, if we're correct, there's really no difference between the real OOP cost of an out-of-state scholarship and an in-state scholarship.

 

[ElrodGrizzly]

Got it, thanks. That's kind of what I was thinking. So, if we're correct, there's really no difference between the real OOP cost of an out-of-state scholarship and an in-state scholarship.

Correct, that would be my understanding, yes. If the University was ever in a situation where we were hitting the cap of available seats, beds, and classroom the conversation would be different. Unfortunately, UM is very obviously nowhere close to that being a problem.

 

[5280Griz]

Has anyone been able to confirm what an athletic scholarship costs UM in $USD out of pocket?

From what I could find is it is based on each student’s actual cost of attendance so scholarships for in state players cost the university less than scholarships for out of state players. There is an important wrinkle to this though. A lot of public FCS universities use tuition waivers for athletes which makes all their scholarships be in state regardless of the student’s residency status. From what I could find UM does use tuition waivers to make all scholarship athletes count as in state students for tuition purposes. Someone can correct me if I am wrong regarding UM.

 

[ElrodGrizzly]

From what I could find is it is based on each student’s actual cost of attendance so scholarships for in state players cost the university less than scholarships for out of state players. There is an important wrinkle to this though. A lot of public FCS universities use tuition waivers for athletes which makes all their scholarships be in state regardless of the student’s residency status. From what I could find UM does use tuition waivers to make all scholarship athletes count as in state students for tuition purposes. Someone can correct me if I am wrong regarding UM.

He is asking about actual cash outlay, not the number on paper. What you wrote above is an example of what the athlete is not paying to the University, but that is not coequal to the University/AD paying money out of its own bank account for the student to attend.

Because the player from out of state would not be coming here if not for football, the question is what does that actually cost the University? They don't pay the professor more because an extra student is in the room. The cost of heating and cooling the buildings doesn't go up. The same admissions people would be paid the same amount whether or not that student athlete was on campus.

CDA is, I think, asking that question to make people think and help them understand that adding scholarships to go up to the FBS is not an actual out of pocket cost in terms of the tuition.

(I still don't want us to move up, but his point is a good one in terms of the argument around adding scholarships).

 

[HelenaHandBasket]

He is asking about actual cash outlay, not the number on paper. What you wrote above is an example of what the athlete is not paying to the University, but that is not coequal to the University/AD paying money out of its own bank account for the student to attend.

Because the player from out of state would not be coming here if not for football, the question is what does that actually cost the University? They don't pay the professor more because an extra student is in the room. The cost of heating and cooling the buildings doesn't go up. The same admissions people would be paid the same amount whether or not that student athlete was on campus.

CDA is, I think, asking that question to make people think and help them understand that adding scholarships to go up to the FBS is not an actual out of pocket cost in terms of the tuition.

(I still don't want us to move up, but his point is a good one in terms of the argument around adding scholarships).

I have heard in the past though that the athletic department is billed for tuition and must transfer money out. This would have an impact on the athletic department finances, which is the big issue for increasing scholarship numbers.

 

[ElrodGrizzly]

I have heard in the past though that the athletic department is billed for tuition and must transfer money out. This would have an impact on the athletic department finances, which is the big issue for increasing scholarship numbers.

That is an odd system, but I don't have any reason to doubt you.

 

[HelenaHandBasket]

That is an odd system, but I don't have any reason to doubt you.

I believe this goes back to Dennison and him using the cash cow to supplement academics and campus infrastructure.

 

[CDAGRIZ]

He is asking about actual cash outlay, not the number on paper. What you wrote above is an example of what the athlete is not paying to the University, but that is not coequal to the University/AD paying money out of its own bank account for the student to attend.

Because the player from out of state would not be coming here if not for football, the question is what does that actually cost the University? They don't pay the professor more because an extra student is in the room. The cost of heating and cooling the buildings doesn't go up. The same admissions people would be paid the same amount whether or not that student athlete was on campus.

CDA is, I think, asking that question to make people think and help them understand that adding scholarships to go up to the FBS is not an actual out of pocket cost in terms of the tuition.

(I still don't want us to move up, but his point is a good one in terms of the argument around adding scholarships).

Thank you kindly, and that is exactly what I'm getting at.

So, we have the facilities.
The scholarships aren't real $-to-$ outflows.
We'd need two sports.
We'd need a fee.

Net the above with the increased conference revenue $, and I wonder how much it would really cost us.

This is all separate from whether we should, and (you're right) just to question whether we could. I'm just wondering how accurate the "we don't have the money" mantra I've read for the last 20 years is.

 

[CDAGRIZ]

I have heard in the past though that the athletic department is billed for tuition and must transfer money out. This would have an impact on the athletic department finances, which is the big issue for increasing scholarship numbers.

Now THAT is interesting.

 

[HelenaHandBasket]

Thank you kindly, and that is exactly what I'm getting at.

So, we have the facilities.
The scholarships aren't real $-to-$ outflows.
We'd need two sports.
We'd need a fee.

Net the above with the increased conference revenue $, and I wonder how much it would really cost us.

This is all separate from whether we should, and (you're right) just to question whether we could. I'm just wondering how accurate the "we don't have the money" mantra I've read for the last 20 years is.

I think scholarships are a budgetary money outflow for the athletic department.

 

[CDAGRIZ]

I believe this goes back to Dennison and him using the cash cow to supplement academics and campus infrastructure.

Maybe a tad shortsighted given what G4 conference membership could bring? Maybe change that up. Maybe change accounting to reflect reality in that regard and cut a deal to supplement academics and campus infrastructure with increased conference $ on the back end or something.

 

[ElrodGrizzly]

Thank you kindly, and that is exactly what I'm getting at.

So, we have the facilities.
The scholarships aren't real $-to-$ outflows.
We'd need two sports.
We'd need a fee.

Net the above with the increased conference revenue $, and I wonder how much it would really cost us.

This is all separate from whether we should, and (you're right) just to question whether we could. I'm just wondering how accurate the "we don't have the money" mantra I've read for the last 20 years is.

I actually am not as into the monetary side of the debate as others. I agree with you that the money could (and would) be found. The initial move up fee would be a challenge, though, I am sure.

That being said, my concern around the finances would be more about revenue being lost if the revenue generating sports were not competing at the top of their new conference. Attendance was starting to slip incrementally under Stitt. I often wonder what would happen to the Griz fanbase if the team was perennially .500 or close in the MW.

 

[HelenaHandBasket]

I actually am not as into the monetary side of the debate as others. I agree with you that the money could (and would) be found. The initial move up fee would be a challenge, though, I am sure.

That being said, my concern around the finances would be more about revenue being lost if the revenue generating sports were not competing at the top of their new conference. Attendance was starting to slip incrementally under Stitt. I often wonder what would happen to the Griz fanbase if the team was perennially .500 or close in the MW.

How dependent UM athletics is to football game attendance is what makes it so difficult. How do they replace that money if it decreases along with the additional funding required to move to FBS? I am not sure they have enough annual big money donors or even donor base. There are substantial hurdles with more state money and increasing student fees. Montana is in a weird place when compared to many other schools.

 

[CDAGRIZ]

I think scholarships are a budgetary money outflow for the athletic department.

That's really just accounting though, right? It still doesn't cost UM as a whole any real money, right?

For simplicity: Say UM has $100, $50 in the AD and $50 in Main Hall. Say tuition/fees are $1. AD has to "pay" MH $1 for the new QB to sit in class, so now the AD has $49 and MH has $51 = $100.