2019 College Football National Championship ticket prices dropping like a rock

[bcla]

WAY before Saban, it was when Dietzel was AD. History major ( I CLEP'd out of 12 hrs of English but wound up suffering through Comp anyway with those players.) I would hope the tutoring policy has changed by now, but I'm guessing that star recruits in profitable sports are still admitted even if they don't meet academic standards.

Depends on what the "standard" is. You're probably aware of how it works, but almost no athletic departments make recruited student-athletes go through the same admissions process as the regular student body. Some schools also have more selective admissions than others, so it can make the difference between the average academics created between those of athletes and the regular student body.

I remember years ago at Cal, they had something they called the A/B/C/D system with annual quotas. They were classified as A (meeting minimum University of California eligibility standards), B (minor deficiencies such as not meeting 1 or 2 class admission requirements or minor GPA/test requirement issues), C (moderate), and D (as low as NCAA minimum eligibility requirements). They had a rough annual quota with a max incoming D tagged admissions at 4, C+D maxed at 16, and B+C+D at maybe 60. There was no limit on the A category. Even then, these were all tagged admissions, since meeting minimum UC eligibility didn't necessarily mean being admitted to a particular campus. For the C and D categories it required that the coach provide an assessment of how the student-athlete was going to improve academic performance. It also required an assessment the athlete is considered a "blue chip" recruit.

I looked it up and it's been revamped. Now the basic standard is that they need to meet UC eligibility requirements other than "limited exceptions".

https://academic-senate.berkeley.ed...lete_admissions_policy_2016-2017_approved.pdf
We intend “exception” to be understood in the general sense, meaning that they have academic profiles significantly different from the average admit. These offers can total no more than 0.25% of all offers in an admissions cycle.​

However, the big deal these days is the "Academic Progress Rate", which is a complex single-year and multi-year average attempt to classify if student-athletes are on the way to graduation. It gets somewhat complicated because there are athletes who leave early to go pro and generally don't graduate. I believe they're trying to make it such that athletes who withdraw but are in good academic standing don't hurt that badly.

http://www.ncaa.org/about/resources/research/division-i-academic-progress-rate-apr

 

[RedAngie]

Which is true but their own fault. I know athletics is a time commitment but plenty of people manage to go to college while having other time consuming commitments. They work full time, have families, young children, are caregivers for elderly parents, etc. Despite having other commitments that take must as much time as athletics they still manage to make their education a priority.

I have a demanding job and a toddler and am in graduate school for my MBA. If I can do that someone can play a sport and still study and graduate with a real degree.

Can they? Many student athletes aren't realistically capable of both sports and a rigorous academic program. And likely a fairly large amount wouldn't even be in college if not for their athletic ability.

 

[LSUmiss]

Can they? Many student athletes aren't realistically capable of both sports and a rigorous academic program. And likely a fairly large amount wouldn't even be in college if not for their athletic ability.

And this isn’t playing sports in high school. At D1, schools it’s almost like a full time job like the NFL.

 

[GreatLakes]

And this isn’t playing sports in high school. At D1, schools it’s almost like a full time job like the NFL.

And plenty of people go to school while working a full time job. Others go while raising a family. Still others go doing both. You can do it.

Student athletes should be held to the same academic standards as any other student. They aren't actually special no matter what the hype machine tells them.

 

[GreatLakes]

Can they? Many student athletes aren't realistically capable of both sports and a rigorous academic program. And likely a fairly large amount wouldn't even be in college if not for their athletic ability.

And that is a problem. A student athlete should first have to meet the academic standards of the school no matter how good they are at their sport. Then they can get a scholarship to play their sport. The sport shouldn't get them in adsent the scholastic qualification.

If you are too stupid to go to college based on your grades you are too stupid to go to college to play a sport.

 

[Cannot_Wait_4Disney]

I completely agree. I love my alma mater but there's no way they should have gone to a bowl game this year and the travesty that was the Cheez-It Bowl proves this. More than half the team couldn't play due to either injury or being suspended/kicked out for bad behavior. We were using a quarterback for part of the game that could only use one foot and thus couldn't run because the other quarterbacks couldn't play.

As for student-athletes, I think it's a scandal that students are allowed to play on the team who shouldn't be at college at all. Those classroom seats are being taken away from applicants who can do the work. My dh majored in engineering which was one of the main weed out programs at our university. He was surprised to meet a football player in his freshman class and was even more astonished when the guy graduated with an engineering degree even though he played football during his entire 4 years in college. The engineering department never would have passed the guy if he hadn't made the grades. They took their jobs very seriously and often told the students that if you mess up someone could die.

The ones that shouldn't be there aren't taking seats away in real classes. They're taking great guts for great jocks and all the frat houses know of and enroll in some of these EZPZ classes to meet some of their Gen Ed requirements.

 

[Cannot_Wait_4Disney]

And that is a problem. A student athlete should first have to meet the academic standards of the school no matter how good they are at their sport. Then they can get a scholarship to play their sport. The sport shouldn't get them in adsent the scholastic qualification.

If you are too stupid to go to college based on your grades you are too stupid to go to college to play a sport.

Many with musical or other talents don't meet general qualifications for top notch academics. Why should those with athletic talent be barred?

 

[Cannot_Wait_4Disney]

And plenty of people go to school while working a full time job. Others go while raising a family. Still others go doing both. You can do it.

Student athletes should be held to the same academic standards as any other student. They aren't actually special no matter what the hype machine tells them.

And how many of them do it with a full time job and a full course load in a rigorous subject such as bio-chem that involves unit overage in 4 years?

Bear in mind just 36% of all students graduate in 4 years. That's everyone including those without jobs and not playing anything and including the easier majors. Some of these athletes are pulling 60 hours a week or more in their sport when you count "voluntary wink wink wink" workouts.

 

[GreatLakes]

And how many of them do it with a full time job and a full course load in a rigorous subject such as bio-chem that involves unit overage in 4 years?

Me. I worked 6 days a week and took no fewer than 14 credit hours as an undergrad. Managed to graduate in 3 years by going straight through summer. It just takes hard work and dedication.

 

[GreatLakes]

Many with musical or other talents don't meet general qualifications for top notch academics. Why should those with athletic talent be barred?

They should have to as well. Unless they are a music major at least.

 

[bcla]

And that is a problem. A student athlete should first have to meet the academic standards of the school no matter how good they are at their sport. Then they can get a scholarship to play their sport. The sport shouldn't get them in adsent the scholastic qualification.

If you are too stupid to go to college based on your grades you are too stupid to go to college to play a sport.

I'm of an opinion that it's not that cut and dried. I've certainly talked to students at some schools where the admission standards are notoriously hard, but the grading standards are notoriously easy. And in talking to student-athletes there, the grading standards make it easier to keep from failing, even with a lot of classes. Some schools that might have a reputation for academic excellence also have a culture that allows professors and lecturers to give student-athletes a break on deadlines given their other obligations. I don't know if it's necessarily capitulating to the athletic dept, but I would say it's realizing that it's a difficult situation to have a course load along with practice and travel - along with actual games.

 

[bcla]

Many with musical or other talents don't meet general qualifications for top notch academics. Why should those with athletic talent be barred?

I know someone who could manage to get into his first choice school based on his English language test scores. He found an out through some obscure rule that allowed some students to substitute an Achievement Test score in one discipline for the SAT Verbal. He was really good at math and that's what he chose.

 

[Cannot_Wait_4Disney]

They should have to as well. Unless they are a music major at least.

Here is a novel idea. How bout we let colleges decide who meets their standards? Academic talent is just one form of talent. Why would any school with an art program not take a future Picaso just because he doesn't do math as well as some other students?

 

[LSUmiss]

And plenty of people go to school while working a full time job. Others go while raising a family. Still others go doing both. You can do it.

Student athletes should be held to the same academic standards as any other student. They aren't actually special no matter what the hype machine tells them.

Well...I wasn’t able to generate millions in revenue for the school when I attended so in that regard they’re definitely more “special” than I was...at least to the university. And I get that.

 

[LSUmiss]

And that is a problem. A student athlete should first have to meet the academic standards of the school no matter how good they are at their sport. Then they can get a scholarship to play their sport. The sport shouldn't get them in adsent the scholastic qualification.

If you are too stupid to go to college based on your grades you are too stupid to go to college to play a sport.

Well the billion $ college football industry disagrees with you & also the billion $ professional football industry.

 

[bcla]

Well the billion $ college football industry disagrees with you & also the billion $ professional football industry.

A lot of athletic departments still have lowered standards for student-athletes and still manage to lose money overall. I heard at the Ivies they still do that, and they don't even worry about how it much it costs to run the athletic dept. They're so flush with endowment money that they don't care.

But for the most part, college football doesn't really make money outside of a few select athletic departments.

http://www.ncaa.org/about/resources...partments-make-more-they-spend-still-minority

A lot of D-I athletic departments without football have figured out the it just costs too much and they've run more efficiently without football. It's just really expensive.

 

[LSUmiss]

A lot of athletic departments still have lowered standards for student-athletes and still manage to lose money overall. I heard at the Ivies they still do that, and they don't even worry about how it much it costs to run the athletic dept. They're so flush with endowment money that they don't care.

But for the most part, college football doesn't really make money outside of a few select athletic departments.

http://www.ncaa.org/about/resources...partments-make-more-they-spend-still-minority

A lot of D-I athletic departments without football have figured out the it just costs too much and they've run more efficiently without football. It's just really expensive.

The only reason I could see for having lowered standards for student-athletes is that the school hopes to build a program that will be profitable one day. Otherwise, I don’t get the point.

 

[bcla]

The only reason I could see for having lowered standards for student-athletes is that the school hopes to build a program that will be profitable one day. Otherwise, I don’t get the point.

Prestige. Like I said earlier, the Ivies don't even pretend that they're going to try to make money off of athletics. Harvard definitely has tagged admissions for student-athletes. The majority of sports don't make money and get tagged admissions. It's certainly a matter of how much help there is with admissions, but these programs are trying to be as competitive as possible, even if that doesn't make them money.

Still - I've had experience with non-revenue programs. I remember talking to a coach about a recruit that got away. Apparently he couldn't get this one recruit admitted because his team didn't warrant any of the exceptions that could have admitted this recruit. Maybe basketball or football could have. But he was able to get in student-athletes who needed just a little bit of help.

 

[bobbiwoz]

Is anyone watching? I am.

 

[tarheelmjfan]

Is anyone watching? I am.

We are. The place is packed. It doesn't appear they had a problem selling tickets. People may not have been able to sell them at outrageous scalper prices, but I think that's a good thing.