App1990 wrote:I must say that the students are more informed than many of us. For those interested to become more informed, the student fee issue underlies a bigger conversation about athletics on campus, which also appeared with parking on Thursday night games. Here some background and information.
First, student fees have been raised since moving to the Sun Belt, considerably actually. Athletics explicitly said the increases were to pay for the increased cost of the move to the Sun Belt. This was expected because, whether the move was good or bad overall, it was expected to increased the annual operating loss (the move increased costs much more than it increased revenue).
Second, the problem was that Cobb, Peacock, etc. misled people about how they were going to pay for the move. They promised to not make students pay for the move. Think George Bush Sr.'s "no new tax pledge". But actually there were plans that increasing athletic fees would be required to cover the increased net losses over time. Rather than waiting, they moved to raise athletic fees considerably the next couple of years, so much that the increases already exhaust the upper bound of the increases planned over the long term. BUT they did not raise ticket prices, which came across (with some truth) that students were paying for the move, not fans. Students began to pay attention, partly because the questionable "no new tax" pledge. They also point out that despite promises that student athletes would not miss any more classes after the move to the Sun Belt, they are missing about twice as much (so much that minimum standards about missing classes had to be lowered a great deal).
It would be a mistake to dismiss the students' concerns. They are very informed and have valid points, and to be honest they know the issues, data and research better than most. Fortunately, this administration is handling it well (yes, the parking issue was part of this bigger concern). The students understand that athletic fees have increased much faster than other fees, that athletic fees are the only fee unrelated to the mission of the university, that athletic fees are the only fee that benefit non-students, that athletic fees are fundamentally a regressive tax that redistributes wealth from relatively poor students to relatively rich fans, that student fees are used to fill in large, recurring operating deficit each year while also serving as an ATM for athletics to spend far more than any responsible business would without this free pot of money, and probably most importantly that despite claims to the contrary directing student fees to athletics does limit the funding for academic activities (e.g., academic needs have been left unmet because the size of the athletic fee constrains the use of other fees for academic purposes).
And impressively, they have read the research that shows shows that alumni giving/interest is enhanced by sports, but is unaffected by the level of sports (playing matters, but it doesn't matter if we are G5 or FCS). And they are aware of the recent studies that show athletics emphasis is associated with poorer student performance (grades decline during successful football seasons) and with increased sexual assaults on campus (assaults increase dramatically on home football games).
What they don't seem to understand it is not just Appalachian. It is a broken system. And I wonder if they realize that Appalachian is not nearly as bad as most G5 programs. The fact is, G5 programs are in a no-mans land that are operating under an unsustainable business model. Things will change. Not sure when, but they will change. Some schools have chosen to stop participating in the system (and done just fine, even better--see Davidson, Northeastern, etc.). Some have chosen to wait and see (JMU, Montana, etc.). Some programs make enrollment decisions to generate student fee revenue rather than to establish academic standards. And many programs have moved forward and struggled a great deal, financially if not competitively (some in the Sun Belt). But we have done amazingly well. When things shake up, we should be in a good position to land on our feet.
P5 lives off of TV. G5 lives off of attendance. The gap between P5 and G5 is growing exponentially by the day. My hope is that G5 will realize this reality and do two things. (1) Reorganize into tighter regional conferences that will save travel, encourage rivalries, and increase attendance, and (2) stop playing the 'keeping up with the Jones' (P5) game and become fiscally responsible by setting a budget based on the fan base interest rather than reaching in to take money from students.
In the end, it is understandable that we love getting most of our entertainment subsidized by them, but it is also understandable that they don't like subsidizing our entertainment. To me they seem pretty impressive because they have their priorities right, and they also seem to be more fiscally responsible than the people we send to DC. I especially like those criticizing the politics of the critics are defending a socialized program of entertainment funded by a tax on students.
Thanks for educating us!!! I bet you win every debate you're in when you're allowed to fabricate "facts" as you go. To summarize:
The key financial areas that come from alumni, Yosef donations and ticket prices, have both risen significantly. The area from students, athletics fees, have remained constant in real dollars. And if anyone doesn't like the amount of the athletics fee, they shouldn't have chosen App so that is completely their fault since they knew about the fee before enrolling.
