|
Post by breezy on Nov 8, 2017 15:10:14 GMT -5
Twitter posts on LOI signings today:
|
|
|
Post by breezy on Nov 8, 2017 15:12:35 GMT -5
There's also a volleyball recruit from Texas but for some reason I cannot copy and paste the Twitter post.
|
|
|
Post by rgs318 on Nov 8, 2017 15:25:55 GMT -5
Perhaps it is the size of the post. After all, folks from the Lone Star State do say everything is bigger there.
|
|
|
Post by breezy on Nov 8, 2017 15:39:13 GMT -5
And:
|
|
|
Post by breezy on Nov 8, 2017 15:41:17 GMT -5
|
|
|
Post by breezy on Nov 8, 2017 15:43:54 GMT -5
One more from Twitter:
|
|
|
Post by breezy on Nov 8, 2017 16:55:15 GMT -5
More:
|
|
|
Post by breezy on Nov 8, 2017 22:08:21 GMT -5
|
|
|
Post by HC92 on Nov 9, 2017 9:30:03 GMT -5
Congrats to all. Huge day in their young lives and the product of a lot of blood, sweat and tears. And miles on the car. Lots of miles on the car.
|
|
|
Post by breezy on Nov 13, 2017 15:32:51 GMT -5
There were a few more last week and then a bunch today:
|
|
|
Post by rgs318 on Nov 13, 2017 15:38:58 GMT -5
Looks like women's track and field is loading up!
|
|
|
Post by purplehaze on Nov 13, 2017 17:03:38 GMT -5
What are the numbers by gender on this thread ? 10-1 for the women - that's all fine but unless you play football or basketball, the chance for men to get an athletic grant at many schools is very slim. At the risk of being politically 'incorrect', the guys who don't play fb or bball are screwed. I'd love to see a little adjustment in the title ix formula. the lesson: all those fathers who have daughters, get them studying and playing a varsity sport - there's athletic money out there !.
|
|
|
Post by hchoops on Nov 13, 2017 17:18:55 GMT -5
Is the total number of schollies skewed to females or does the large amount of football schollies make it about even ?
|
|
|
Post by HC13 on Nov 13, 2017 17:36:55 GMT -5
Is the total number of schollies skewed to females or does the large amount of football schollies make it about even ? The difference is due to the number of FB schollies.
|
|
|
Post by Pakachoag Phreek on Nov 13, 2017 17:53:50 GMT -5
Is the total number of schollies skewed to females or does the large amount of football schollies make it about even ? If there is shewing to the ladies, it is at schools that are 42:58 M/F, e.g., BostonU, where without football, the number of women's scollies outpaces those for the men. Its my impression that at BCS football schools, the number of scollies for the men outpace those for the women. This is tolerated because BCS football brings in so much in the way of revenue. The ladies sports generate near $0 when it comes to revenue, and everyone recognizes, even the ladies, that football is the cash cow (plus hoops at a few schools).
|
|
|
Post by rgs318 on Nov 13, 2017 17:58:09 GMT -5
Is the total number of schollies skewed to females or does the large amount of football schollies make it about even ? The ladies sports generate near $0 when it comes to revenue, and everyone recognizes, even the ladies, that football is the cash cow (plus hoops at a few schools). If you know offhand, what colleges make money on hoops? I have never heard of any that come out on the plus side of that equation.
|
|
|
Post by Pakachoag Phreek on Nov 13, 2017 18:40:12 GMT -5
The ladies sports generate near $0 when it comes to revenue, and everyone recognizes, even the ladies, that football is the cash cow (plus hoops at a few schools). If you know offhand, what colleges make money on hoops? I have never heard of any that come out on the plus side of that equation. Duke and Louisville immediately come to mind. Syracuse too. Xavier and Dayton, because they own the arenas. Marquette. Duke's revenue total may be skewed because so much of men's basketball at Duke has its own endowment, which is included in generated revenue. Louisville may generate the biggest profit, it was an ungodly sum, which convinced me why RP got away with so much for so long. Looking at the NCAA revenue report for 2015, 64 FBS schools reported men's hoops revenue exceeded expenses; three FCS schools (Dayton?) reported that, and two Div I schools without football (Xavier?, Marquette?) reported that.
|
|
|
Post by rgs318 on Nov 13, 2017 18:48:46 GMT -5
Thanks, Pak.
|
|
|
Post by breezy on Nov 13, 2017 18:51:16 GMT -5
One more:
|
|
|
Post by KY Crusader 75 on Nov 13, 2017 18:52:49 GMT -5
Despite the 20,000 fans per game for basketball at U of L and football revenue as well, U of L has to subsidize athletics at something like $6MM per year. Schools don't "earn a profit" on basketball because the $$ received just go to fuel the arms race.
|
|
|
Post by Pakachoag Phreek on Nov 13, 2017 20:33:28 GMT -5
Despite the 20,000 fans per game for basketball at U of L and football revenue as well, U of L has to subsidize athletics at something like $6MM per year. Schools don't "earn a profit" on basketball because the $$ received just go to fuel the arms race. Time for a whistleblower suit. Make yourself some money. In 2015-16, men's hoops expenses were $17.9M Men's hoops revenue was $45.6MThe hoops revenue was about $5 million more than the football revenue. Louisville does report an overall profit of $3 million. However, amount of university subsidy, if any, is not shown.
Duke's men's hoops expenses were also $17.9M, revenues were $31 million.
Syracuse men's hoops had a $13M profit. $13.9M / $26.9M
|
|
|
Post by KY Crusader 75 on Nov 13, 2017 20:43:36 GMT -5
The number that I cited for the subsidy is what I recalled from a recent article in the print Courier-Journal.
|
|
|
Post by Pakachoag Phreek on Nov 14, 2017 6:07:54 GMT -5
The number that I cited for the subsidy is what I recalled from a recent article in the print Courier-Journal. A recent article could mean the datum is from the 2016-17 NCAA report, and the extracted data from those reports are not yet on the NCAA site. Or, the university subsidy is buried in the revenue summary in the Title IX reports. The Title IX reports aggregate revenue and expenses. The only publicly available NCAA reports that I've ever seen are from public universities, and often these are in states with 'right to know' type laws. The $35 million that JMU collects in student fees for athletics represents a massive subsidization of that athletic program.
|
|
|
Post by matunuck on Nov 14, 2017 9:35:41 GMT -5
The ladies sports generate near $0 when it comes to revenue, and everyone recognizes, even the ladies, that football is the cash cow (plus hoops at a few schools). If you know offhand, what colleges make money on hoops? I have never heard of any that come out on the plus side of that equation. www.cbsnews.com/news/how-villanova-gets-its-moneys-worth-from-basketball/
|
|
|
Post by HC92 on Nov 14, 2017 15:12:15 GMT -5
Is the total number of schollies skewed to females or does the large amount of football schollies make it about even ? If there is shewing to the ladies, it is at schools that are 42:58 M/F, e.g., BostonU, where without football, the number of women's scollies outpaces those for the men. Its my impression that at BCS football schools, the number of scollies for the men outpace those for the women. This is tolerated because BCS football brings in so much in the way of revenue. The ladies sports generate near $0 when it comes to revenue, and everyone recognizes, even the ladies, that football is the cash cow (plus hoops at a few schools). The Title IX regs essentially require that the ratio of male to female scholarship dollars match the ratio of the student body so the 42/58 school should give 58% of its scholarship money to females.
|
|