Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

cost vs benefit

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • #76
    Re: cost vs benefit

    Originally posted by Osorojo View Post
    But is the result of seeking and subsidizing short-timer hockey players better or worse for the college hockey program involved? You have missed the point.
    For who?

    Remember, schools are broken into different departments- for this question, it's athletic and acedemic.

    For the athletic department, it's either cost neutral or cost beneficial- as mentioned before, you have fixed scholarships- so assuming you fill your series of ONE YEAR CONTRACTS (note the emphasis)- your scholarship costs are always the same wether you have all elite players who stay for 4 years, all that leave after 2, a mix- whatever. They have to be renewed each year, and once a student-athlete leaves, then there is no longer a cost associated with that student. There are two ways that it is cost beneficial to the program- the first is if the student leaves so late that the team is not able to fill that scholarship slot- so the athletic program saves that money for that one season. The second is obvious- they manage to sell more tickets. But you will find that most programs who have the problem the worst already sell out every season, and they manage to sell out all of the tickets that the NCAA gives them for tournament games. So unless the school can raise ticket prices based on a few players for a short while- more than likely, the additional sales will be pretty minimal since they are generally sold out.

    In addition to that, one must consider that many of the schools that have this problem also have a rather major donor program in place where many, if not all, of the scholarships are part of an endowment that is supported by the booster programs- so, in fact, the athletic program doens't really see the impact of the change.

    Moving toward the academic side- where it can be considered wooden nickels, but there is money that is moved from one department to the other. For acedemics- it's a wash or a negative. A wash- since the amount of money that can be transferred from the athletic department to the academic is fixed at 18 heads per academic calendar year. It can be a negative IF the scholarship does not go used, since it will lower the money the athletic department transfers to the academic department.

    If you want real numbers, fill them in with the costs from a specific school.

    There you go.

    Comment


    • #77
      Re: cost vs benefit

      Originally posted by Brenthoven View Post
      He'd start a thread wondering what the costs/benefits would be if a) he did it himself or b) if he hired someone else to do it for him.
      Originally posted by Dirty View Post
      Which is that you are so lazy you probably refuse to wipe your own arse.
      I'm guessing C...Doesn't do it at all...

      Comment


      • #78
        Re: cost vs benefit

        Originally posted by thebrain View Post
        I'm guessing C...Doesn't do it at all...
        He probably lets his cat clean him.
        Having a clear conscience just means you have a bad memory or you had a boring weekend.

        RIP - Kirby

        Comment


        • #79
          Re: cost vs benefit

          Originally posted by bigblue_dl View Post
          He probably lets his cat clean him.
          TMI!!!
          bueller: Why is the sunset good? Why are boobs good? Why does Positrack work? Why does Ferris lose on the road and play dead at home?

          It just happens.


          nmupiccdiva: I'm sorry I missed you this weekend! I thought I saw you at the football game, but I didn't want to go up to a complete stranger and ask "are you Monster?" and have it not be you!

          leswp1: you need the Monster to fix you

          Life is active, find Balance!massage therapy Ann Arbor

          Comment


          • #80
            Re: cost vs benefit

            This forum is privileged to have several contributing experts on defecatory hygiene, but they have not provided pertinent information or expressed an opinion about the original subject of this thread, which had to do with college hockey.

            The cost of awarding scholarships is fixed, but the results are not. The benefit of having talented pro prospects on a college team is clear and undeniable. The problems created by one-and-done players are not as easily perceived, except maybe by coaches. The quick departures of players who briefly form the nucleus of a team create problems with planning, recruiting, and coaching.

            The consensus of coherent fans seems to be that the presence of talent, even if it is raw and short-term talent, more than makes up for the problems caused by constant and rapid changes at the heart of the roster. Maybe so, but there is cause for doubt.

            Comment


            • #81
              Re: cost vs benefit

              Have you conducted a study on this doubt? If not, why? I believe it is your duty to conduct a study on doubt.
              Hollywood Hair Care Tip for Infinity (Directly from Hollywood himself)
              when its minus 20 and u have to go outside.. make sure u wear a winter hat as the mohawk does not enjoy the winter weathe(r)
              Hollywood Amazingness

              Comment


              • #82
                Re: cost vs benefit

                Originally posted by Osorojo View Post
                This forum is privileged to have several contributing experts on defecatory hygiene
                *****http://4.bp.blogspot.com/_hARfj2G9Cls/S_W0j2ItJgI/AAAAAAAAC08/x1LSv1TqHMo/s1600/Stupid+Haircut.jpg******


                Originally posted by Osorojo View Post
                but they have not provided pertinent information or expressed an opinion about the original subject of this thread, which had to do with college hockey.

                The cost of awarding scholarships is fixed, but the results are not. The benefit of having talented pro prospects on a college team is clear and undeniable. The problems created by one-and-done players are not as easily perceived, except maybe by coaches. The quick departures of players who briefly form the nucleus of a team create problems with planning, recruiting, and coaching.

                The consensus of coherent fans seems to be that the presence of talent, even if it is raw and short-term talent, more than makes up for the problems caused by constant and rapid changes at the heart of the roster. Maybe so, but there is cause for doubt.
                *****http://bengaliboypaul.com/images/demotivators2005/cluelessness.jpg******
                Code:
                As of 9/21/10:         As of 9/13/10:
                College Hockey 6       College Football 0
                BTHC 4                 WCHA FC:  1
                Originally posted by SanTropez
                May your paint thinner run dry and the fleas of a thousand camels infest your dead deer.
                Originally posted by bigblue_dl
                I don't even know how to classify magic vagina smoke babies..
                Originally posted by Kepler
                When the giraffes start building radio telescopes they can join too.
                He's probably going to be a superstar but that man has more baggage than North West

                Comment

                Working...
                X