(01-23-2018 09:57 AM)quo vadis Wrote:  

(01-23-2018 09:36 AM)arkstfan Wrote:  

(01-23-2018 01:35 AM)Tom in Lazybrook Wrote:  

(01-22-2018 09:40 PM)arkstfan Wrote:  I'm OK with reasonable athletic fees, it is after all an amenity but there has to be a limit. $100 a semester not a big deal. $300? That's pushing it. $500? Come on.

Many G5 schools charge more than 500 a year per student. Just for athletics. And that's before the hidden charges (such as lost tuition due to scholarships, instate waivers for tuition, etc.) are taken into account.

Some schools charge more than a grand a year per student.

Its getting out of hand. Asking a 30 year old working mom who is getting a nursing degree at night to borrow 4 grand to get a BS in Nursing so the school can pay a million bucks to a head football coach and 250,000 to a couple of Assistant Coaches is insane.

And while revenues have been flat or declining at many schools, some schools continue to pour ever increasing amounts of money into athletics (mainly football) year, after year, after year, after year....with little accountability to the people paying for it.

BTW, Arkansas State isn't one of the worst offenders. Not really calling out Arkansas State.

I know because I've been paying AState's fees but as a parent of a now former student, I think when you cross into charging students nearly $100 a month, you've crossed the line into the students subsidizing the fans who aren't carrying the department's cost.

True, and it's not just students subsidizing fans, they are subsidizing other students as well, students who aren't really drawn from the general student population.

What I mean is, the typical student who pays an athletic fee isn't paying for an opportunity for themselves, an opportunity they could realistically avail themselves of if they wanted. Because even though sure, there are walk-ons, the bulk of student athletes aren't drawn from that general population, they are specifically recruited as athletes and if they weren't, they likely wouldn't be attending that university.

So students paying the fees aren't really paying for opportunities for themselves. They are effectively excluded from the group of students who benefit most from the fees, the athletes.

That makes an athletic fee difference from a Chemistry fee. I may be a Business major with no interest in Chemistry, but if i wanted, i could readily take Chemistry classes or be a Chemistry major. In that sense, Chemistry is a viable opportunity there for me, an option, even if i choose not to exploit it.

Joining the basketball team would be a different story.

But students wanting to become certified athletic trainers do utilize intercollegiate athletics to get internship hours.

At AState at least the RTV department (think it has new name now) gets real-life experience shooting games, running the boards, directing, and there are usually several video interns producing promotional videos and shooting game film. A friend's son was flown to Orlando to shoot video for AState cheer at a national competition. My nephew's wife went to Central Arkansas and got her marketing job from experience doing video for UCA athletics. A friend of my son and the son-in-law of a former co-worker used his work with the athletic department to land a job at ESPN and is currently a small market sports anchor.

Athletics also provides student opportunities in cheer, dance, and band per my son's former girlfriend it is hard to get a high school music teaching position in Arkansas if you haven't been a drum major for the marching band.

Athletics rarely provides competition slots for the general student body but do provide a number of educational opportunities.