AFter reading the frontpage articles on the latest with conference realignment involving TCU, it appears that the door might be cracked open a little bit more in regards to ND joining the ACC. If ND were to present a plan similar to the one that was rumored to have been done with the Big 10 in which ND would immediately join the ACC in all sports except for football, but would have a transition plan in place in which football would be a full conference member over an agreed upon period of time. Should and would the ACC agree to a plan like this with ND? What are your thoughts? I think the ACC should; and then bring in UConn as the 16th member. I still don't see PSU leaving the Big 10; but then again it's hard for me to see ND leaving football independence too.
The problem here, i suppose, is with revenue sharing. perhaps the TV contract can be bifurcated, with x for Football and x for Basketball and revenue sharing with Notre Dame would just be with respect to Basketball. Then, what do you do as they "transition," over a period of time when becoming partial members for Football, up and until becoming full members? Not insolvable, certainly, and it would need to be approved part and parcel of joining by ACC Presidents.
The service academies are expensive! Here's one indirect source:
If these were full-fledged universities the cost accounting would be complicated by the cost of research. This is less relevant here (although profs do publish), but the service academies do indirectly support the military mission in their intramural research and development. At the AF Academy, moreover, there is a fleet of aircraft used for pilot training. Makes sense -- eh? -- and this is properly an education expense.The GAO issued a report in September 2003 (publication GAO-03-1000) on Military Education and gave the following cost per graduate for the Fiscal year 2002:
USMA: $349,327
USNA: $275,001
USAFA: $322,750
This cost was the total operating cost of the academy devided by the number of graduates. Assuming some inflation, the value for the Class of 2010 will likely be closer to $400,000.
What does this mean for athletics? I am prepared to believe that the marginal cost of athletics: operations, travel, coaches salaries are paid for by earned revenue and donations from the very active alumni populations. But what about the cost of educating athletes? If athletes become active duty officers and if the number of cadets and midshipmen is not swollen by the influx of athletes, then it is a case of taking varsity-level athletes over some other class of applicants -- not obviously a bad trade for the military, given the physical demands in military service.
What do athletes get for enrolling at the academies: same as other students. Here's the poop --
$100 per month is barely walking around money (but, of course, if you are locked up on campus, what does it matter?). $400 per month used to be used by upper classmen to make car payments; don't know the current practice. But it seems to me -- naive as I am -- that 400 bucks would finance a modest but reasonable off-campus social life.Midshipmen pay is $864 monthly, from which laundry, barber, cobbler, activities fees, yearbook and other service charges are deducted. Actual cash pay is $100 per month your first year, increasing each year to $400 per month in your fourth year.
sagegrouse
Last edited by sagegrouse; 10-07-2011 at 01:40 PM. Reason: To fix the typos inserted by DBR in my original
"Midshipmen pay is $864 monthly, from which laundry, barber, cobbler, activities fees, yearbook and other service charges are deducted. Actual cash pay is $100 per month your first year, increasing each year to $400 per month in your fourth year."
Cobbler? Who has a cobbler? And how much does that yearbook cost, anyway?
The above could allow a merger with the thread on paying athletes. The more I think about it, the more I'm inclined to allow a stipend that would more comfortably allow athletes from financially-strapped families to go to college, especially since they can't easily work. Give 'em launder, barber, cobbler, etc, and $200/month.
But I digress. Getting Notre Dame (or Texas) is a bit like taking the homecoming queen or king to the senior prom. A real attention getter, but what do you get at the end of the evening? Unless ND is really committed, being the escort of the HQ or HK can make us look a little silly, and do we really care about ND's Olympic sports? From my very biased perspective, ND could use a foothold up and down the east coast to streamline its entry into the top tier of academia. Again, I'm biased, but I'd think ND's ongoing access to media markets is more important than a few million bucks per year in additional football money. That's much less impt to Texas, which--like all state schools--cares most about its region, and it'd be self defeating for a Texas to suddenly try to create rivalries with Clemson, WF, etc, when its alumni wouldn't know where those schools even are,
Recruited student athletes at Navy, Army, Airforce, Coast Guard and USMMA have service requirements after graduation through which they repay their education benefits. Same as all students attending the academies. No longical reason to think of Academy athletic departments being charged for the costs of education.
(btw, Naval ROTC scholarship midshipmen receive regular Navy commissions like Annapolis grads. The cost to educate scholarship ROTC candidates is lower, even at private universities. But, that is beside the point. The service academies arguably provide the best military educations in the world. This costs money.)
Recruited Football and Basketball players at the D-1 service academies have higher academic cutoffs for the reason that they will receive regular (not reserve) active duty commissions. College level math, as in Calculus as well as Computer Science, i believe are requirements. And the training is to encourage career service in the military.
As to Notre Dame, great, assuming (as has been pointed out) the overall deal is reasonable. But why would one assume the 16th team should/would be U-CONN? It seems like there is substantial firm opposition from a solid bloc of ACC presidents to their admission. And I've heard no ACC member schools or conference officials speak out enthusiastically about the need to admit U-CONN. If the conference wanted U-CONN, would it not likely have brought them in with either Pitt or Syracuse rather than leave them on the side. None of three has a super football program. and U-CONN has a better basketball program. Theoretically, perhaps, they'd be the most attractive of the three based on the major sports programs. But there's something else going on, isn't there? There's some other reason the ACC isn't enthusiastic about U-CONN. Some degree of discomfort. Something that makes many of us uncomfortable with the prospect.
Perhaps the continuing cascade of ethical/moral/legal/values issues in which U-CONN sems to always be aswim also doesn't make them a fit partner for the ACC both as it is and as it aspires to be. The fact that there are some sports scandals in the ACC currently would seem to lessen further the chances for U-CONN's admission rather than justify it as some have said. It would tarnish the tradional (relatively) fairly good rep of the ACC further. Moreover, what could the ACC expect from U-CONN after admitting them? We'd be foolish to expect anything other than a continuing well-established pattern of corner-cutting and cheating related to the bkb program. How often do zebras change their stripes?
As to a 16th member, yes, it would be hard to peruade Penn St. but doesn't the prospect of adding both ND and Penn St. as a pair make admission more attractive to each of them? Wouldn't it result in a blockbuster television deal for the league as thus constituted...and a windfall for all? (Contrast that with what U-CONN would add to the television package or in in inducing ND to join the ACC?)
Indeed. but I think, alas, that the concerns of today are what occupies the thoughts of most conference bigwigs and network mavens.
But you're absolutely right about the historical football tradiition of Syracuse and Pitt. And I'm glad to have it now gracing the ACC...along with those two fine schools and the contributions they have made in various fields of endeavor for decades. Their admission to the conference was a wise choice in these turbulent times.
Last edited by SmartDevil; 10-08-2011 at 10:01 AM.
Exactly, if Notre Dame were to join the ACC along with one other, the priority would be:
1. Penn State #45 academically for too many reasons to mention, including ones you just did plus just having set the stage a bit with Pitt
Before Rutgers or UCONN though, I might take a run at some schools seemingly tied to their conference #12 Northwestern and #17 Vandy and AAU, an academic misfit in SEC, to go with #19 Notre Dame. Rutgers would have appeal for ND too for its proximity to NYC, UCONN not so much.
2. Northwestern #12 and AAU for the Chicago market (515 K TV share lowest in B1G who would not object very much) to give ND some geographic company. Ok to add a non football power if with ND but too much subsidy for NW to give up.
3. Vandy #17 and AAU to go with #19 Notre Dame - (380 K TV share is lowest in SEC but again would never leave all that subsidy and don't awaken the sleeping giant SEC for revenge in a battle ACC would lose)
4. Rutgers #68 and AAU for that NY/NJ market and 938 K TV share, another double counter +1 for ACC and -1 for B1G with respect to attracting ND
5. UCONN #58 for its basketball and 619 K TV share. Nobody else wants them so no rush.
None of PSU, NW or Vandy are all that likely even with ND, with PSU surprisingly the most likely of the 3.
So it probably boils down to taking Rutgers before UCONN but only with either ND or PSU, if ACC can't get both, not as a stand alone duo for ACC 15-16.