SOCON FUTURE PRO GAMES

[apaladin]

Here is what each team has scheduled against pro teams(formerly FBS) after this year.
UTC 6 scheduled. Last one-2031
Citadel 6 scheduled. Last one-2033
ETSU 2 scheduled Last one-2026
Furman 2 scheduled. Last one-2026
Mercer 1 scheduled. Last one-2025
Samford 1 scheduled. Last one-2027
VMI 7 scheduled. Last one-2032
WCU 2 scheduled. Last one-2031
Wofford 3 scheduled. Last one-2028

[The Jackal]

*that you know about.

[apaladin]

*that you know about.

If there is a contract, it’s out there so it is all for now.

[apaladin]

Since the P4 leagues are now pro leagues, I assume the G5 will follow and the fcs will follow on a smaller scale. Supposedly there will be a separate entity from the ncaa and schools to keep up with this. It is supposed to be based on profit sharing but most schools don’t make a profit so how will that work? Also title nine will not come into play. So you will not have to pay a softball player the same as a football player. Players will not be employees either. Don’t see how all of this will work and it still has to be approved by a judge(good luck with that). Gonna be a big mess.

[Affirm]

Since the P4 leagues are now pro leagues, I assume the G5 will follow and the fcs will follow on a smaller scale. Supposedly there will be a separate entity from the ncaa and schools to keep up with this. It is supposed to be based on profit sharing but most schools don’t make a profit so how will that work? Also title nine will not come into play. So you will not have to pay a softball player the same as a football player. Players will not be employees either. Don’t see how all of this will work and it still has to be approved by a judge(good luck with that). Gonna be a big mess.

If FCS schools follow suit, maybe it will be the sort of salary offered to President Gerald Ford when his playing days as a University of Michigan were offered. To be paid after each game, the salary offered was $100 per game. Ford decided instead to accept an assistant coach job at Yale - where he wanted to go to law school but was unable to get accepted in the beginning of his time in New Haven. Once finally accepted, her proceeded to pursue football coaching and Yale Law School simultaneously.).
If we were to pay 63 team members that amount for 12 games each season, our annual football salaries budget would be roughly $100,000.00 per season. Could we afford this? Would we have to offer 80% scholarships to football players instead of 100% football scholarships instead?
(I realize that FUBeAR knows, and that I do not know, how the financing of football scholarships works at schools like Furman.)

[FUBeAR]

(I realize that FUBeAR knows, and that I do not know, how the financing of football scholarships works at schools like Furman.)

Nope … FUBeAR would need to review ALL of FU’s financial records to understand fully how athletics scholarships are treated.

FUBeAR does know they are NOT accounted for by Athletics writing a check to the University in a manner similar to how athletics might pay for athletic tape and book it as an expense. The ‘cost’ of athletics scholarships, most likely, involves a much more complex and nuanced financial treatment within FU’s financial records.

BUT…related to that … here’s another matter associated with this NCAA ‘plan’ to handle these lawsuits and restructure - “Roster Size Limits are “in” / Scholarship limits are “out”. Again, we would need to see the fine print of a final plan, but FUBeAR is reading that Football roster sizes will be capped at 85 and scholarship limits will be eliminated. That works great for the big schools as they all ‘fully funded’ their 85 allowed scholarships AND in recent years expanded their rosters by using NIL Collective Funding to fully ‘scholarship’ as many “walk-on’s” as they desired - typically 10-20. Now, they won’t have to ‘waste’ that NIL money on the ‘worst’ 10-20 Players and can use it to distribute more to the 85 Roster Players whose ‘scholarship expenses’ they will also cover…knowing their competitors are playing on a level field … roster-size-wise.

So…your 1st thought may be, “Wow, that means 1,340-2,680 ‘FBS Quality’ Players are gonna be ‘off-rostered’ by FBS Teams and available to play FCS Football. FCS Foootball is going to be so much better!” And, you would be correct about the numbers, but FUBeAR would disagree with you about a significant quality uptick. The bottom 10-20 Players on an FBS roster, would probably fall into the 35-55 ranking level of Players on an FCS roster - so, some more barely visible quality depth. Great to have, but not really very ‘sexy’ in the big picture.

OTOH …Furman had around 120 Players on last year’s roster. So, way oversimplifying the ‘math’, FU was receiving full tuition from 57 ‘students’ (whole or partial ‘students’) who happened to also be on the Football roster. In the new world, FU will only be able to receive full tuition from 22 whole or partial ‘students’ that also happen to be on the Football roster. So…further over-simplifying the math, that’s 35 x 80k = $2.8 million in tuition revenue that FU’s VP of Enrollment management has to find from elsewhere …cuz in most cases, those young men aren’t coming to Furman if they don’t get to wear their purple jerseys in Paladin Stadium on Saturday’s in the Fall. They can take their tuition $’s to Alabama or Clemson or to MIT and also NOT play D1 Football instead.

So…that certainly hurts the Football Team’s overall contribution to the University. And, also…Furman’s FCS competitors may also be in a better financial position to ‘fund’ an 85 man (non-tuition-generating) roster than Furman is…further compounding the economic issues with this whole thing. Maybe not, but maybe so.

Stay tuned…

[apaladin]

My head hurts after readng FuBeAR’s post,

[aqualung]

(I realize that FUBeAR knows, and that I do not know, how the financing of football scholarships works at schools like Furman.)

Nope … FUBeAR would need to review ALL of FU’s financial records to understand fully how athletics scholarships are treated.

FUBeAR does know they are NOT accounted for by Athletics writing a check to the University in a manner similar to how athletics might pay for athletic tape and book it as an expense. The ‘cost’ of athletics scholarships, most likely, involves a much more complex and nuanced financial treatment within FU’s financial records.

BUT…related to that … here’s another matter associated with this NCAA ‘plan’ to handle these lawsuits and restructure - “Roster Size Limits are “in” / Scholarship limits are “out”. Again, we would need to see the fine print of a final plan, but FUBeAR is reading that Football roster sizes will be capped at 85 and scholarship limits will be eliminated. That works great for the big schools as they all ‘fully funded’ their 85 allowed scholarships AND in recent years expanded their rosters by using NIL Collective Funding to fully ‘scholarship’ as many “walk-on’s” as they desired - typically 10-20. Now, they won’t have to ‘waste’ that NIL money on the ‘worst’ 10-20 Players and can use it to distribute more to the 85 Roster Players whose ‘scholarship expenses’ they will also cover…knowing their competitors are playing on a level field … roster-size-wise.

So…your 1st thought may be, “Wow, that means 1,340-2,680 ‘FBS Quality’ Players are gonna be ‘off-rostered’ by FBS Teams and available to play FCS Football. FCS Foootball is going to be so much better!” And, you would be correct about the numbers, but FUBeAR would disagree with you about a significant quality uptick. The bottom 10-20 Players on an FBS roster, would probably fall into the 35-55 ranking level of Players on an FCS roster - so, some more barely visible quality depth. Great to have, but not really very ‘sexy’ in the big picture.

OTOH …Furman had around 120 Players on last year’s roster. So, way oversimplifying the ‘math’, FU was receiving full tuition from 57 ‘students’ (whole or partial ‘students’) who happened to also be on the Football roster. In the new world, FU will only be able to receive full tuition from 22 whole or partial ‘students’ that also happen to be on the Football roster. So…further over-simplifying the math, that’s 35 x 80k = $2.8 million in tuition revenue that FU’s VP of Enrollment management has to find from elsewhere …cuz in most cases, those young men aren’t coming to Furman if they don’t get to wear their purple jerseys in Paladin Stadium on Saturday’s in the Fall. They can take their tuition $’s to Alabama or Clemson or to MIT and also NOT play D1 Football instead.

So…that certainly hurts the Football Team’s overall contribution to the University. And, also…Furman’s FCS competitors may also be in a better financial position to ‘fund’ an 85 man (non-tuition-generating) roster than Furman is…further compounding the economic issues with this whole thing. Maybe not, but maybe so.

Stay tuned…

I think that FUBear is overthinking this a bit. There is no incremental gain or loss to FU by a student paying their tuition and also playing football as a walk-on. If 35 walk-ons go away, the admissions dept. just opens up the spigot a bit and admits 35 additional qualified applicants in. Easy peasy.

[FUBeAR]

(I realize that FUBeAR knows, and that I do not know, how the financing of football scholarships works at schools like Furman.)

Nope … FUBeAR would need to review ALL of FU’s financial records to understand fully how athletics scholarships are treated.

FUBeAR does know they are NOT accounted for by Athletics writing a check to the University in a manner similar to how athletics might pay for athletic tape and book it as an expense. The ‘cost’ of athletics scholarships, most likely, involves a much more complex and nuanced financial treatment within FU’s financial records.

BUT…related to that … here’s another matter associated with this NCAA ‘plan’ to handle these lawsuits and restructure - “Roster Size Limits are “in” / Scholarship limits are “out”. Again, we would need to see the fine print of a final plan, but FUBeAR is reading that Football roster sizes will be capped at 85 and scholarship limits will be eliminated. That works great for the big schools as they all ‘fully funded’ their 85 allowed scholarships AND in recent years expanded their rosters by using NIL Collective Funding to fully ‘scholarship’ as many “walk-on’s” as they desired - typically 10-20. Now, they won’t have to ‘waste’ that NIL money on the ‘worst’ 10-20 Players and can use it to distribute more to the 85 Roster Players whose ‘scholarship expenses’ they will also cover…knowing their competitors are playing on a level field … roster-size-wise.

So…your 1st thought may be, “Wow, that means 1,340-2,680 ‘FBS Quality’ Players are gonna be ‘off-rostered’ by FBS Teams and available to play FCS Football. FCS Foootball is going to be so much better!” And, you would be correct about the numbers, but FUBeAR would disagree with you about a significant quality uptick. The bottom 10-20 Players on an FBS roster, would probably fall into the 35-55 ranking level of Players on an FCS roster - so, some more barely visible quality depth. Great to have, but not really very ‘sexy’ in the big picture.

OTOH …Furman had around 120 Players on last year’s roster. So, way oversimplifying the ‘math’, FU was receiving full tuition from 57 ‘students’ (whole or partial ‘students’) who happened to also be on the Football roster. In the new world, FU will only be able to receive full tuition from 22 whole or partial ‘students’ that also happen to be on the Football roster. So…further over-simplifying the math, that’s 35 x 80k = $2.8 million in tuition revenue that FU’s VP of Enrollment management has to find from elsewhere …cuz in most cases, those young men aren’t coming to Furman if they don’t get to wear their purple jerseys in Paladin Stadium on Saturday’s in the Fall. They can take their tuition $’s to Alabama or Clemson or to MIT and also NOT play D1 Football instead.

So…that certainly hurts the Football Team’s overall contribution to the University. And, also…Furman’s FCS competitors may also be in a better financial position to ‘fund’ an 85 man (non-tuition-generating) roster than Furman is…further compounding the economic issues with this whole thing. Maybe not, but maybe so.

Stay tuned…

I think that FUBear is overthinking this a bit. There is no incremental gain or loss to FU by a student paying their tuition and also playing football as a walk-on. If 35 walk-ons go away, the admissions dept. just opens up the spigot a bit and admits 35 additional qualified applicants in. Easy peasy.

Aqualung is assuming infinite demand for an FU education.

Economics, inflation, cost of capital, etc., etc., etc, may very well have a chilling effect on the demand for education services / experiences such as those provided by Furman University in the near future.

With what we witnessed on college campuses this spring, that chilling may come much sooner than expected.

We all know how it feels to turn that tap and only hear a sucking sound. 35 extra at-the-ready pours can go a long way to quenching a school’s revenue thirst!

[Furmanoid]

I’ve been substituting in Aiken Co. schools for about 5 years. Kids are getting way more practical. Over the last couple of years it’s become rare for anyone to leave the area. They just go to USC-Aiken or, if they’re really medical, Augusta U. A handful go to CU and 1/2 handful to USC. In the last 2 years, more and more are going into trades. GenZ has figured it out, damn it. Not good for prestige salesmen. The kids that maybe 10-20 yrs ago would have considered Furman now go to USC -Aiken and chuckle at the difference in price ($0 vs $60K).

[apaladin]

FU may have to do some readjusting.

[Roundball]

FU may have to do some readjusting.

No worries so far with Elizabeth Davis and the Board of Trustees in control. HIgh schools students still want to attend Furman. https://www.furman.edu/news/application ... %20percent.

[Affirm]

FU may have to do some readjusting.

No worries so far with Elizabeth Davis and the Board of Trustees in control. HIgh schools students still want to attend Furman. https://www.furman.edu/news/application ... %20percent.

Impressive.
But what is the actual yield (# actually attending of the # accepted from the # who applied); & then what is the retention rate.
Hopefully all good.

[FUBeAR]

FU may have to do some readjusting.

No worries so far with Elizabeth Davis and the Board of Trustees in control. HIgh schools students still want to attend Furman. https://www.furman.edu/news/application ... %20percent.

Good point. FUBeAR recently saw the article below and thought most of that uptick in applications was due to the addition of this wonderful-sounding class…

https://www.furman.edu/news/where-ther ... tradition/
Where there’s smoke, there’s BBQ: MayX pulls apart the tradition
The students in “BBQ: It’s a Noun, Not a Verb” spend three weeks learning the many facets of the ancient method of cooking meat that’s become a pop culture phenomenon in recent years.

But…FUBeAR, excited to learn more about a BBQ class @ FU, kept reading…

“They cover the history of barbecue, inherent racism and appropriation, the environmental impact of cooking with wood and creating demand for hogs and cattle reared en masse by corporate conglomerates…”

“We’ve looked at wood sourcing. That’s a lot of impact…”

“Another topic the class explores is diversity. In an industry dominated for decades by white men…”


…and FUBeAR, then, wasn’t sure. Maybe this IS the lens through which 18 year olds of today want to analyze BBQ. FUBeAR is ‘old school.’ He has made an extensive lifetime study of BBQ of the Carolinas, but he has tended to focus on the GOOD EATIN’ parts, as opposed to deeply searching for some inflammatory alleged aspects of the topic to dissect to distraction.


Outstanding results to increase applications to FU so substantially. FUBeAR has to wonder, though, perhaps apropos of the issue, about the sustainability of those results.


* BTW … “Cattle?” Thought this class was about BBQ … ¯\_(ツ)_/¯

[youwouldno]

I was on the fence about whether it was worth ponying up the cash for my daughter in HS to attend Furman, but I'm definitely sold now that she can learn about how BBQ is an expression of white supremacy, I mean, who wouldn't pay 250,000 to get their child indoctrinated into gay race communism . . . Bargain at twice the price!