Yes, I think. As stated, the story doesn't explain how a profit is realized. Also, if this cost were absorped by the athletic department, it would have Title IX implications for the department. When the Chronicle of Higher Education published its figure of $3.2 in revenue about six months ago, we discussed whether it was legitimate to include financial aid to players, and other university aid to the program, as revenue. It then backed out as an expense to the athletic department the cost of aid to students, and reflected the difference between the two as part of the profit to the program. -- FORDHAM RAMS FOOTBALL FORUM

>

[ Show ]

Support VoyForums

[ Shrink ]

VoyForums Announcement: Programming and providing support for this service has been a labor of love since 1997. We are one of the few services online who values our users' privacy, and have never sold your information. We have even fought hard to defend your privacy in legal cases; however, we've done it with almost no financial support -- paying out of pocket to continue providing the service. Due to the issues imposed on us by advertisers, we also stopped hosting most ads on the forums many years ago. We hope you appreciate our efforts.

Show your support by donating any amount. (Note: We are still technically a for-profit company, so your contribution is not tax-deductible.) PayPal Acct: Feedback:

Donate to VoyForums (PayPal):

[ Login ] [ Contact Forum Admin ] [ Main index ] [ Post a new message ] [ Search | Check update time | Archives: 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, [7], 8, 9, 10 ]

Subject: Yes, I think. As stated, the story doesn't explain how a profit is realized. Also, if this cost were absorped by the athletic department, it would have Title IX implications for the department. When the Chronicle of Higher Education published its figure of $3.2 in revenue about six months ago, we discussed whether it was legitimate to include financial aid to players, and other university aid to the program, as revenue. It then backed out as an expense to the athletic department the cost of aid to students, and reflected the difference between the two as part of the profit to the program.

Author:
JoltinJoe
[ Next Thread | Previous Thread | Next Message | Previous Message ]
Date Posted: 00:09:05 12/27/04 Mon
In reply to: FC78 's message, "Aid Accounting" on 23:36:53 12/26/04 Sun

[ Next Thread | Previous Thread | Next Message | Previous Message ]

Replies:

Subject Author Date

I'd add only that it doesn't make you an AFF crazy to recognize that the accountings reflecting a profit for the football program are questionable, because they don't take into account financial aid awarded to the football players as a football-related expense. That's why I noted that the Enquirer story didn't explain how this "profit" was realized. The poster above was more interested in calling people names than trying to comprehend what was being said. I support football, but I think it's misleading to tout that its a money-maker for the school. (NT) JoltinJoe 07:50:54 12/27/04 Mon

The Chronicle doesn't use the sharpest pencil in the world when they publish reports like these. They take the numbers as submitted by schools or conferences but don't explain how they are arrived at. I'm not sure how scholarships can be defined as income in this case. I do know that financial contributions to the school are not considered "profits" by CASE, which publishes standards and practices for the higher ed fundraising. (NT) An Old Coach 10:04:53 12/27/04 Mon