Hello There, Guest! (LoginRegister)

Post Reply 
Cost of Attendance: The New Arms Race? Article
Author Message
Side Show Joe Offline
Hall of Famer
*

Posts: 10,005
Joined: Mar 2010
Reputation: 394
I Root For: North Texas
Location: TEXAS
Post: #1
Cost of Attendance: The New Arms Race? Article
The P5's are set. They have reached the top of the college football world. For the G5, we are constantly jockeying for position to leverage ourselves into better situations. Among the G5 we already see an arms race for facilities, now the coat of attendance could become an arms race too. How programs are able to fund their COA, and at what level, could play a very important role in which G5's rise and which fall behind. Student athletes are now getting paid. It only makes sense that from here on out, many recruits will be looking for the best paycheck they can get. Here is a very interesting article about how FBS programs in Texas are funding this new expense.

https://www.expressnews.com/sports/artic...132632.php
08-05-2018 09:30 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
Advertisement


DavidSt Offline
Hall of Famer
*

Posts: 23,011
Joined: Dec 2013
Reputation: 729
I Root For: ATU, P7
Location:
Post: #2
RE: Cost of Attendance: The New Arms Race? Article
I do not think the P5 are settled yet. With this, the many lawsuits, the COA, travel cost, staying at hotels, feeding the athletes and other costs could still hurt them. It could get more expensive which I do think the top G5 schools still could be added to the P5 structure to help ease the costs down some. Just need to get the school Presidents on board that you can't have schools like Florida State in the PAC 12, or Arizona in the Big 10. You can not add Texas and Oklahoma into the PAC 12 as well. I think that is what Gee was talking about earlier this year.
08-06-2018 03:56 AM
Visit this user's website Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
arkstfan Away
Sorry folks
*

Posts: 25,818
Joined: Feb 2004
Reputation: 967
I Root For: Fresh Starts
Location:
Post: #3
RE: Cost of Attendance: The New Arms Race? Article
Funny how COA was going to be a bank-breaker that finally drove schools out of FBS or Division I and so far no such evidence.
08-06-2018 11:26 AM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
SkullyMaroo Offline
Moderator
*

Posts: 11,193
Joined: Mar 2009
Reputation: 635
I Root For: South Alabama
Location: Mobile
Post: #4
RE: Cost of Attendance: The New Arms Race? Article
(08-06-2018 11:26 AM)arkstfan Wrote:  Funny how COA was going to be a bank-breaker that finally drove schools out of FBS or Division I and so far no such evidence.

Well the CFP is giving more money to the G5 than the BCS did, so the G5 are able to pay COA with that. The problem is the G5 is basically being paid off to be locked out of the actual playoff.
08-06-2018 11:43 AM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
arkstfan Away
Sorry folks
*

Posts: 25,818
Joined: Feb 2004
Reputation: 967
I Root For: Fresh Starts
Location:
Post: #5
RE: Cost of Attendance: The New Arms Race? Article
(08-06-2018 11:43 AM)SkullyMaroo Wrote:  
(08-06-2018 11:26 AM)arkstfan Wrote:  Funny how COA was going to be a bank-breaker that finally drove schools out of FBS or Division I and so far no such evidence.

Well the CFP is giving more money to the G5 than the BCS did, so the G5 are able to pay COA with that. The problem is the G5 is basically being paid off to be locked out of the actual playoff.

I'm an old fart. I remember when there wasn't a "system" per se but we were locked out of it and got $0 for being locked out.
08-06-2018 03:10 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
Side Show Joe Offline
Hall of Famer
*

Posts: 10,005
Joined: Mar 2010
Reputation: 394
I Root For: North Texas
Location: TEXAS
Post: #6
RE: Cost of Attendance: The New Arms Race? Article
(08-06-2018 11:26 AM)arkstfan Wrote:  Funny how COA was going to be a bank-breaker that finally drove schools out of FBS or Division I and so far no such evidence.

When you look at the chart you can see the COA is increasing at mnay of the Texas universities listed. The article even claimed Texas A&M paid the lowest amount in the SEC when the COA was first implemented. Now they have nearly doubled their funding and pay the highest COA in the state of Texas. Houston pays more then Texas and Texas Tech. Some might see that as a very smart strategy for universities that can afford it.

In the near future, the increasing burden of funding competitive COA stipends could effect the quality of recruiting at some G5 programs. It is just one more factor athletic departments will have to juggle as they allocate their budgets.
08-06-2018 03:21 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
Advertisement


Attackcoog Offline
Moderator
*

Posts: 44,735
Joined: Oct 2011
Reputation: 2860
I Root For: Houston
Location:
Post: #7
RE: Cost of Attendance: The New Arms Race? Article
(08-06-2018 03:21 PM)Side Show Joe Wrote:  
(08-06-2018 11:26 AM)arkstfan Wrote:  Funny how COA was going to be a bank-breaker that finally drove schools out of FBS or Division I and so far no such evidence.

When you look at the chart you can see the COA is increasing at mnay of the Texas universities listed. The article even claimed Texas A&M paid the lowest amount in the SEC when the COA was first implemented. Now they have nearly doubled their funding and pay the highest COA in the state of Texas. Houston pays more then Texas and Texas Tech. Some might see that as a very smart strategy for universities that can afford it.

In the near future, the increasing burden of funding competitive COA stipends could effect the quality of recruiting at some G5 programs. It is just one more factor athletic departments will have to juggle as they allocate their budgets.

Pretty sure the FCOA is capped by a formula that every school must use. You can decide how much of the full FCOA you wish pay your athletes---but you cant pay more than than the formula indicates and you cant just arbitrarily elect to pay a FCOA thats higher than your peers to attract recruits.
(This post was last modified: 08-06-2018 03:32 PM by Attackcoog.)
08-06-2018 03:31 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
Side Show Joe Offline
Hall of Famer
*

Posts: 10,005
Joined: Mar 2010
Reputation: 394
I Root For: North Texas
Location: TEXAS
Post: #8
RE: Cost of Attendance: The New Arms Race? Article
(08-06-2018 03:31 PM)Attackcoog Wrote:  
(08-06-2018 03:21 PM)Side Show Joe Wrote:  
(08-06-2018 11:26 AM)arkstfan Wrote:  Funny how COA was going to be a bank-breaker that finally drove schools out of FBS or Division I and so far no such evidence.

When you look at the chart you can see the COA is increasing at mnay of the Texas universities listed. The article even claimed Texas A&M paid the lowest amount in the SEC when the COA was first implemented. Now they have nearly doubled their funding and pay the highest COA in the state of Texas. Houston pays more then Texas and Texas Tech. Some might see that as a very smart strategy for universities that can afford it.

In the near future, the increasing burden of funding competitive COA stipends could effect the quality of recruiting at some G5 programs. It is just one more factor athletic departments will have to juggle as they allocate their budgets.

Pretty sure the FCOA is capped by a formula that every school must use. You can decide how much of the full FCOA you wish pay your athletes---but you cant pay more than than the formula indicates and you cant just arbitrarily elect to pay a FCOA thats higher than your peers to attract recruits.

Did you read the article? I don't know how the NCAA polices the COA, or if they do at all. I've never seen a formula. I don't know what formula would allow A&M to nearly double their COA from one year to the next. Seems fishy. Not saying I have a problem with it, just don't have enough information.
08-06-2018 03:58 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
Attackcoog Offline
Moderator
*

Posts: 44,735
Joined: Oct 2011
Reputation: 2860
I Root For: Houston
Location:
Post: #9
RE: Cost of Attendance: The New Arms Race? Article
(08-06-2018 03:58 PM)Side Show Joe Wrote:  
(08-06-2018 03:31 PM)Attackcoog Wrote:  
(08-06-2018 03:21 PM)Side Show Joe Wrote:  
(08-06-2018 11:26 AM)arkstfan Wrote:  Funny how COA was going to be a bank-breaker that finally drove schools out of FBS or Division I and so far no such evidence.

When you look at the chart you can see the COA is increasing at mnay of the Texas universities listed. The article even claimed Texas A&M paid the lowest amount in the SEC when the COA was first implemented. Now they have nearly doubled their funding and pay the highest COA in the state of Texas. Houston pays more then Texas and Texas Tech. Some might see that as a very smart strategy for universities that can afford it.

In the near future, the increasing burden of funding competitive COA stipends could effect the quality of recruiting at some G5 programs. It is just one more factor athletic departments will have to juggle as they allocate their budgets.

Pretty sure the FCOA is capped by a formula that every school must use. You can decide how much of the full FCOA you wish pay your athletes---but you cant pay more than than the formula indicates and you cant just arbitrarily elect to pay a FCOA thats higher than your peers to attract recruits.

Did you read the article? I don't know how the NCAA polices the COA, or if they do at all. I've never seen a formula. I don't know what formula would allow A&M to nearly double their COA from one year to the next. Seems fishy. Not saying I have a problem with it, just don't have enough information.

I couldnt read the article--it was behind a pay wall. My guess is A&M probably was not paying the full FCOA in year one. ArkStfan can probably tell you more about the formula--but I know it exists.
(This post was last modified: 08-06-2018 04:07 PM by Attackcoog.)
08-06-2018 04:06 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
MWC Tex Offline
Heisman
*

Posts: 7,850
Joined: Aug 2012
Reputation: 179
I Root For: MW
Location: TX
Post: #10
RE: Cost of Attendance: The New Arms Race? Article
Seems this will soon be walking the fine line of being consider an amateur status vs professional.
08-06-2018 04:18 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
BullsFanInTX Offline
Hall of Famer
*

Posts: 10,485
Joined: May 2008
Reputation: 338
I Root For: USF
Location:
Post: #11
RE: Cost of Attendance: The New Arms Race? Article
(08-06-2018 03:58 PM)Side Show Joe Wrote:  
(08-06-2018 03:31 PM)Attackcoog Wrote:  
(08-06-2018 03:21 PM)Side Show Joe Wrote:  
(08-06-2018 11:26 AM)arkstfan Wrote:  Funny how COA was going to be a bank-breaker that finally drove schools out of FBS or Division I and so far no such evidence.

When you look at the chart you can see the COA is increasing at mnay of the Texas universities listed. The article even claimed Texas A&M paid the lowest amount in the SEC when the COA was first implemented. Now they have nearly doubled their funding and pay the highest COA in the state of Texas. Houston pays more then Texas and Texas Tech. Some might see that as a very smart strategy for universities that can afford it.

In the near future, the increasing burden of funding competitive COA stipends could effect the quality of recruiting at some G5 programs. It is just one more factor athletic departments will have to juggle as they allocate their budgets.

Pretty sure the FCOA is capped by a formula that every school must use. You can decide how much of the full FCOA you wish pay your athletes---but you cant pay more than than the formula indicates and you cant just arbitrarily elect to pay a FCOA thats higher than your peers to attract recruits.

Did you read the article? I don't know how the NCAA polices the COA, or if they do at all. I've never seen a formula. I don't know what formula would allow A&M to nearly double their COA from one year to the next. Seems fishy. Not saying I have a problem with it, just don't have enough information.

The formula for FCOA is not determined by anyone in athletics. No one in athletics sets the FCOA amount. The financial aid office determines the amount by preset formulas.

Alabama can't just go out and offer a 25,000 dollar FCOA stipend...because the formulas for figuring COA don't support it. They are all in the same basic range, around 3-6 thousand dollars or so. A school does not have to fully fund it.
08-06-2018 04:28 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
Advertisement


NoDak Offline
Jersey Retired
Jersey Retired

Posts: 6,958
Joined: Oct 2005
Reputation: 105
I Root For: UND
Location:
Post: #12
RE: Cost of Attendance: The New Arms Race? Article
With rent being outrageous in the Palo Alto area, imagine Stanford has the highest FCOA.
08-06-2018 04:45 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
arkstfan Away
Sorry folks
*

Posts: 25,818
Joined: Feb 2004
Reputation: 967
I Root For: Fresh Starts
Location:
Post: #13
RE: Cost of Attendance: The New Arms Race? Article
(08-06-2018 04:28 PM)BullsFanInTX Wrote:  
(08-06-2018 03:58 PM)Side Show Joe Wrote:  
(08-06-2018 03:31 PM)Attackcoog Wrote:  
(08-06-2018 03:21 PM)Side Show Joe Wrote:  
(08-06-2018 11:26 AM)arkstfan Wrote:  Funny how COA was going to be a bank-breaker that finally drove schools out of FBS or Division I and so far no such evidence.

When you look at the chart you can see the COA is increasing at mnay of the Texas universities listed. The article even claimed Texas A&M paid the lowest amount in the SEC when the COA was first implemented. Now they have nearly doubled their funding and pay the highest COA in the state of Texas. Houston pays more then Texas and Texas Tech. Some might see that as a very smart strategy for universities that can afford it.

In the near future, the increasing burden of funding competitive COA stipends could effect the quality of recruiting at some G5 programs. It is just one more factor athletic departments will have to juggle as they allocate their budgets.

Pretty sure the FCOA is capped by a formula that every school must use. You can decide how much of the full FCOA you wish pay your athletes---but you cant pay more than than the formula indicates and you cant just arbitrarily elect to pay a FCOA thats higher than your peers to attract recruits.

Did you read the article? I don't know how the NCAA polices the COA, or if they do at all. I've never seen a formula. I don't know what formula would allow A&M to nearly double their COA from one year to the next. Seems fishy. Not saying I have a problem with it, just don't have enough information.

The formula for FCOA is not determined by anyone in athletics. No one in athletics sets the FCOA amount. The financial aid office determines the amount by preset formulas.

Alabama can't just go out and offer a 25,000 dollar FCOA stipend...because the formulas for figuring COA don't support it. They are all in the same basic range, around 3-6 thousand dollars or so. A school does not have to fully fund it.

There isn't actually a "formula", call 'em guidelines.

Schools in the same city will reach a different conclusion about what the costs of attendance beyond tuition, books and fees should be.

There is no easy plug in X, Y, and get result Z standardized formula.
08-06-2018 05:24 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
Side Show Joe Offline
Hall of Famer
*

Posts: 10,005
Joined: Mar 2010
Reputation: 394
I Root For: North Texas
Location: TEXAS
Post: #14
RE: Cost of Attendance: The New Arms Race? Article
(08-06-2018 04:28 PM)BullsFanInTX Wrote:  
(08-06-2018 03:58 PM)Side Show Joe Wrote:  
(08-06-2018 03:31 PM)Attackcoog Wrote:  
(08-06-2018 03:21 PM)Side Show Joe Wrote:  
(08-06-2018 11:26 AM)arkstfan Wrote:  Funny how COA was going to be a bank-breaker that finally drove schools out of FBS or Division I and so far no such evidence.

When you look at the chart you can see the COA is increasing at mnay of the Texas universities listed. The article even claimed Texas A&M paid the lowest amount in the SEC when the COA was first implemented. Now they have nearly doubled their funding and pay the highest COA in the state of Texas. Houston pays more then Texas and Texas Tech. Some might see that as a very smart strategy for universities that can afford it.

In the near future, the increasing burden of funding competitive COA stipends could effect the quality of recruiting at some G5 programs. It is just one more factor athletic departments will have to juggle as they allocate their budgets.

Pretty sure the FCOA is capped by a formula that every school must use. You can decide how much of the full FCOA you wish pay your athletes---but you cant pay more than than the formula indicates and you cant just arbitrarily elect to pay a FCOA thats higher than your peers to attract recruits.

Did you read the article? I don't know how the NCAA polices the COA, or if they do at all. I've never seen a formula. I don't know what formula would allow A&M to nearly double their COA from one year to the next. Seems fishy. Not saying I have a problem with it, just don't have enough information.

The formula for FCOA is not determined by anyone in athletics. No one in athletics sets the FCOA amount. The financial aid office determines the amount by preset formulas.

Alabama can't just go out and offer a 25,000 dollar FCOA stipend...because the formulas for figuring COA don't support it. They are all in the same basic range, around 3-6 thousand dollars or so. A school does not have to fully fund it.

So each universities financial aid office is responsible for their formula? If so, that doesn't seem too difficult to manipulate.

Yes, no school has to fund it. But, it will certainly be used as a recruiting tool. I wish you could read the article. It went into detail about how it is already occurring. Not saying I have a problem with the COA being a recruiting tool. G5 universities are looking for every advantage they can get, and I see the COA as being a growing factor.
08-06-2018 05:26 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
Side Show Joe Offline
Hall of Famer
*

Posts: 10,005
Joined: Mar 2010
Reputation: 394
I Root For: North Texas
Location: TEXAS
Post: #15
RE: Cost of Attendance: The New Arms Race? Article
(08-06-2018 05:24 PM)arkstfan Wrote:  
(08-06-2018 04:28 PM)BullsFanInTX Wrote:  
(08-06-2018 03:58 PM)Side Show Joe Wrote:  
(08-06-2018 03:31 PM)Attackcoog Wrote:  
(08-06-2018 03:21 PM)Side Show Joe Wrote:  When you look at the chart you can see the COA is increasing at mnay of the Texas universities listed. The article even claimed Texas A&M paid the lowest amount in the SEC when the COA was first implemented. Now they have nearly doubled their funding and pay the highest COA in the state of Texas. Houston pays more then Texas and Texas Tech. Some might see that as a very smart strategy for universities that can afford it.

In the near future, the increasing burden of funding competitive COA stipends could effect the quality of recruiting at some G5 programs. It is just one more factor athletic departments will have to juggle as they allocate their budgets.

Pretty sure the FCOA is capped by a formula that every school must use. You can decide how much of the full FCOA you wish pay your athletes---but you cant pay more than than the formula indicates and you cant just arbitrarily elect to pay a FCOA thats higher than your peers to attract recruits.

Did you read the article? I don't know how the NCAA polices the COA, or if they do at all. I've never seen a formula. I don't know what formula would allow A&M to nearly double their COA from one year to the next. Seems fishy. Not saying I have a problem with it, just don't have enough information.

The formula for FCOA is not determined by anyone in athletics. No one in athletics sets the FCOA amount. The financial aid office determines the amount by preset formulas.

Alabama can't just go out and offer a 25,000 dollar FCOA stipend...because the formulas for figuring COA don't support it. They are all in the same basic range, around 3-6 thousand dollars or so. A school does not have to fully fund it.

There isn't actually a "formula", call 'em guidelines.

Schools in the same city will reach a different conclusion about what the costs of attendance beyond tuition, books and fees should be.

There is no easy plug in X, Y, and get result Z standardized formula.

Thanks. That is what I thought.

Do you know if there is a database with the entire FBS COA funding information?
08-06-2018 05:28 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
DavidSt Offline
Hall of Famer
*

Posts: 23,011
Joined: Dec 2013
Reputation: 729
I Root For: ATU, P7
Location:
Post: #16
RE: Cost of Attendance: The New Arms Race? Article
The top G5 schools who can keep up with the P5 schools could be moved to the P5 status. We do have a lot of G5 schools paying more than P5 schools in COAs.
We are now seeing a break away of haves and have nots at the FCS levels.
08-07-2018 04:45 AM
Visit this user's website Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
Advertisement


arkstfan Away
Sorry folks
*

Posts: 25,818
Joined: Feb 2004
Reputation: 967
I Root For: Fresh Starts
Location:
Post: #17
RE: Cost of Attendance: The New Arms Race? Article
(08-06-2018 05:28 PM)Side Show Joe Wrote:  
(08-06-2018 05:24 PM)arkstfan Wrote:  
(08-06-2018 04:28 PM)BullsFanInTX Wrote:  
(08-06-2018 03:58 PM)Side Show Joe Wrote:  
(08-06-2018 03:31 PM)Attackcoog Wrote:  Pretty sure the FCOA is capped by a formula that every school must use. You can decide how much of the full FCOA you wish pay your athletes---but you cant pay more than than the formula indicates and you cant just arbitrarily elect to pay a FCOA thats higher than your peers to attract recruits.

Did you read the article? I don't know how the NCAA polices the COA, or if they do at all. I've never seen a formula. I don't know what formula would allow A&M to nearly double their COA from one year to the next. Seems fishy. Not saying I have a problem with it, just don't have enough information.

The formula for FCOA is not determined by anyone in athletics. No one in athletics sets the FCOA amount. The financial aid office determines the amount by preset formulas.

Alabama can't just go out and offer a 25,000 dollar FCOA stipend...because the formulas for figuring COA don't support it. They are all in the same basic range, around 3-6 thousand dollars or so. A school does not have to fully fund it.

There isn't actually a "formula", call 'em guidelines.

Schools in the same city will reach a different conclusion about what the costs of attendance beyond tuition, books and fees should be.

There is no easy plug in X, Y, and get result Z standardized formula.

Thanks. That is what I thought.

Do you know if there is a database with the entire FBS COA funding information?

Never have looked.
08-07-2018 08:16 AM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
CliftonAve Online
Heisman
*

Posts: 21,880
Joined: May 2012
Reputation: 1171
I Root For: Jimmy Nippert
Location:
Post: #18
RE: Cost of Attendance: The New Arms Race? Article
Cincinnati pays one of the highest COA allowances in the country. I don't think it has done anything to help us on the recruiting trail.

Related to the UNC Shoe Story that is breaking: Weren't we told when the COA was first being implemented it was needed to curb that sort of behavior?
08-07-2018 08:35 AM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
ken d Offline
Hall of Famer
*

Posts: 17,334
Joined: Dec 2013
Reputation: 1211
I Root For: college sports
Location: Raleigh
Post: #19
RE: Cost of Attendance: The New Arms Race? Article
(08-06-2018 05:24 PM)arkstfan Wrote:  
(08-06-2018 04:28 PM)BullsFanInTX Wrote:  
(08-06-2018 03:58 PM)Side Show Joe Wrote:  
(08-06-2018 03:31 PM)Attackcoog Wrote:  
(08-06-2018 03:21 PM)Side Show Joe Wrote:  When you look at the chart you can see the COA is increasing at mnay of the Texas universities listed. The article even claimed Texas A&M paid the lowest amount in the SEC when the COA was first implemented. Now they have nearly doubled their funding and pay the highest COA in the state of Texas. Houston pays more then Texas and Texas Tech. Some might see that as a very smart strategy for universities that can afford it.

In the near future, the increasing burden of funding competitive COA stipends could effect the quality of recruiting at some G5 programs. It is just one more factor athletic departments will have to juggle as they allocate their budgets.

Pretty sure the FCOA is capped by a formula that every school must use. You can decide how much of the full FCOA you wish pay your athletes---but you cant pay more than than the formula indicates and you cant just arbitrarily elect to pay a FCOA thats higher than your peers to attract recruits.

Did you read the article? I don't know how the NCAA polices the COA, or if they do at all. I've never seen a formula. I don't know what formula would allow A&M to nearly double their COA from one year to the next. Seems fishy. Not saying I have a problem with it, just don't have enough information.

The formula for FCOA is not determined by anyone in athletics. No one in athletics sets the FCOA amount. The financial aid office determines the amount by preset formulas.

Alabama can't just go out and offer a 25,000 dollar FCOA stipend...because the formulas for figuring COA don't support it. They are all in the same basic range, around 3-6 thousand dollars or so. A school does not have to fully fund it.

There isn't actually a "formula", call 'em guidelines.

Schools in the same city will reach a different conclusion about what the costs of attendance beyond tuition, books and fees should be.

There is no easy plug in X, Y, and get result Z standardized formula.

Another thing to consider is that FCOA as calculated by each school is an average. Actual costs will vary from student to student depending on things like where their home is in relation to the school. Trips home during breaks can be as little as a few bucks to thousands. And athletes at major schools are recruited from all over the country, not just locally. Many have to fly home.

I'm not sure whether the formula admissions departments use allow for making individual exceptions when it comes to paying athletic stipends.
08-07-2018 09:21 AM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
Side Show Joe Offline
Hall of Famer
*

Posts: 10,005
Joined: Mar 2010
Reputation: 394
I Root For: North Texas
Location: TEXAS
Post: #20
RE: Cost of Attendance: The New Arms Race? Article
This is a data base for all FBS universities COA for the 2015-16 season. It was posted by an FIU fan over on the C-USA board. Thought I'd re-post it on this one. Interesting stuff.

https://www.cbssports.com/college-footba...-database/
08-07-2018 03:40 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
Post Reply 




User(s) browsing this thread: 1 Guest(s)


Copyright © 2002-2024 Collegiate Sports Nation Bulletin Board System (CSNbbs), All Rights Reserved.
CSNbbs is an independent fan site and is in no way affiliated to the NCAA or any of the schools and conferences it represents.
This site monetizes links. FTC Disclosure.
We allow third-party companies to serve ads and/or collect certain anonymous information when you visit our web site. These companies may use non-personally identifiable information (e.g., click stream information, browser type, time and date, subject of advertisements clicked or scrolled over) during your visits to this and other Web sites in order to provide advertisements about goods and services likely to be of greater interest to you. These companies typically use a cookie or third party web beacon to collect this information. To learn more about this behavioral advertising practice or to opt-out of this type of advertising, you can visit http://www.networkadvertising.org.
Powered By MyBB, © 2002-2024 MyBB Group.