"Pay-to-play" - a blessing in disguise?

[komey1]

Re: "Pay-to-play" - a blessing in disguise?

Scholarships or not, if that's RIT's FULL program cost per player, then they must be doing just fine financially.

Season attendance for RIT in 2009-10 was 37,282. $8,074 * 25 guys on the roster (assuming they divided by everybody) = expenses of $201,850. Divide that by 37,282 tickets sold, and you're looking at $5.41 per ticket.

Add $36k to that total expense budget (lets say only 18 guys get the bonus money), you're up to $6.38 per ticket. I'd happily pay that.

I'm guessing that's not the whole expense number... it's not including something. Is this gas for the bus, rent for the arena (or, say, cooling and zamboni maintenance if its school-owned), coaches salaries, administrative overhead, everything? Seems awfully low.

The AHA is a bus league aside from Air Force. Their only plane trips were to Air Force and Minnesota State that year.

The arena is an on-campus arena, and also hosts the woman's team and has public skating, so I would not expect arena expenses to be there.

 

[Shirtless Guy]

Re: "Pay-to-play" - a blessing in disguise?

Ok question...everyone keeps saying that pay to play $$$ can only go to players getting a full ride but that really doesn't make sense. Let's look at the numbers for a non-headcount sport like Hockey.

Old scenario for full year(I'll use Michigan Tech):
Tuition - $13,200 ($26,200 out of state)
Room & Board - $8,600
Books & Supplies - $1,200
Full Ride scholarship: $23,000 (36,000)
so partials are:
75% - $17,250 ($27,075)
50% - $11,500 ($18,050)
25% - $5,750 ($9,025)

So if we add the $2,000 stipend, why don't the 75, 50, 25% not increase by $1,500, $1k, $500?