Looks like UNT Cost of Attendance is in effect

[Harry]

And that is a good thing in my opinion.

[JesseMartin]

There are two ways you can view this.  In the first scenario, they don't need it and it's extra money that makes them comfier than necessary.  In the second, it's absolutely necessary and ensures that our kids are fed and housed and well taken care of.  

The fact is, if it's an addition and not a necessity, the worst thing that happens is that the cost is spread among a ton of people - some students, many concessions-eaters and ticket-buyers and the like - and they get a bit more compensation for the NCAA brand they create (which doesn't make UNT rich, but certainly contributes a ton to the P5 and the NCAA overall - and why should their kids be the only ones to get treated well?).

However, if it IS a necessity, and those of us who are skeptical are wrong...and they really do need this to cover expenses (depending on the year, they may be pressured to exit on-campus housing if there's a shortage of beds), but do NOT receive it...then our athletes, who we've welcomed into our fold, will be hurting.

Remember, things are a lot more strict and even though the NCAA doesn't sniff around every school all the time, the paranoia is there...if you feel bad for someone who needs something to eat, and they're a student-athlete, there are literally PAGES of rules that may or may not pertain to feeding them!  Are there better ways to fix this?  Probably.  In the meantime, do we want to risk how right or wrong we may be about how much this is needed?  Hell, no!  Better safe than sorry.

[TheFranchise]

@JesseMartin,

I love your take on this, sir. Honestly, it reminds me of a colleague I worked with in the past.

Back in the early 80's, he was a D-1 NCAA pitcher for, well, I'll just call it a VERY well-known baseball program. Sometime around, I believe it was his junior year, the Christmas break hit and everyone was leaving campus to be with family. His coaches asked him his plans and he said something to the effect of, "Well, I'm a little short on money so I'm just going to hang out with some friends here around campus, maybe catch a movie or something and talk on the phone with family."

Saddened and sympathetic about this, the coach handed him fifty bucks and said, "Go drive home and spend the holiday with your family. Any extra from this, use it to get some food on the way."

Somehow the NCAA found out about this the next summer and the dude lost his entire senior year of eligibility.

I understand the need to keep these athletes as "amateurs," and I support that. But the fact that a kid can't be given a few bucks for gas and snacks to go see family is beyond ridiculous. It's even further stupid that a full year of eligibility would have been lost on account of it.

For this reason, I support the "reasonable" stipends for cost of attendance.

[UNT90]

If your friend was an important player for a "very well known" baseball program, I doubt $50 was the only money he ever received and I also doubt that a one time, $50 sympathy gift cost h a year of eligibility. 

 

But it it does make for a good story. A story that I'm sure he tells often.

[outoftown]

Hmmm. what I take from this is, that the AD felt incapable to give this number to Vito who put a FOIA in before giving the physical cheques to the athletes. Are they really stiffing the only guy writing about UNT athletics on a thing such as this? He would have run a nice story that would not have hurt or helped anybody. Either Vito has pissed off the AD something fierce (seeing his always politically correct pieces I wonder with what he possibly could have) or the AD is playing it too close to the vest for their own good.

[Army of Dad]

Hmmm. what I take from this is, that the AD felt incapable to give this number to Vito who put a FOIA in before giving the physical cheques to the athletes. Are they really stiffing the only guy writing about UNT athletics on a thing such as this? He would have run a nice story that would not have hurt or helped anybody. Either Vito has pissed off the AD something fierce (seeing his always politically correct pieces I wonder with what he possibly could have) or the AD is playing it too close to the vest for their own good.

Vito was fairly critical of the softball mass exodus and Coach Kee, the most critical I recall him being since Dodge.

He has handled Benford with kid gloves and been pretty willing to parrot the company line in football so that should have counted for something.

[oldguystudent]

Either Vito has pissed off the AD something fierce 

I don't have any inside information on this, but I speculate that he really, really didn't make any friends during the Dodge years, and has been unable to make his way back in.

[UNT90]

I really hope we aren't giving 19 and 20 year olds a 4k check. I hope someone is smart enough to realize this needs to be given in installment payments over the course of the Fall and Spring semester.

 

Otherwise it's like giving the money straight to Winstar.

[JesseMartin]

 

I really hope we aren't giving 19 and 20 year olds a 4k check. I hope someone is smart enough to realize this needs to be given in installment payments over the course of the Fall and Spring semester.

 

Otherwise it's like giving the money straight to Winstar.

Haha, I mentioned that before!

[4MYMGE]

For those kids that do not have family that can help them...for those kids skipping weekend meals...for the kids that can only put 1 gallon of gas in their car when it needs a "fill-up"...I am happy.  They are learning to manage their lives and expenses while they are not able to hold a regular job.  Their daily schedule is full and I do not believe that will have money to "waste" even with the monthly "extra".

[foutsrouts]

I really hope we aren't giving 19 and 20 year olds a 4k check. I hope someone is smart enough to realize this needs to be given in installment payments over the course of the Fall and Spring semester.

 

Otherwise it's like giving the money straight to Winstar.

Or hitting Winstar with the remaining bucks on the way back from a quick run up to CO. 

[Side Show Joe]

CBS Sports quoted the North Texas stipend at $3,982, which would place us 2nd in the conference behind FAU, and first among Texas C-USA program. But in 2016, FIU and UAB will offer more then UNT.

Compared to all other Texas programs, here is how CBS Sports ranks them:

Texas Tech $4,820

TCU $4,700

Houston $4,544

Texas $4,310

North Texas $3,982

Texas A&M $3,528

UTEP $3,216

Texas State $3,060

SMU $2,676

UTSA $2,506

Baylor NA

Rice NA

Here is the link... http://www.cbssports.com/collegefootball/writer/jon-solomon/25275374/-16-cbs-sports-fbs-college-football-cost-of-attendance-database

[DallasGreen]

With no significant student athletic fee where is this money coming from? My guess is increased ticket prices and more expensive MGC membership, meanwhile students will skate on in with an I.d. And the cheapest fee in Texas!

[James]

With no significant student athletic fee where is this money coming from? My guess is increased ticket prices and more expensive MGC membership, meanwhile students will skate on in with an I.d. And the cheapest fee in Texas!

Unless the product on the field is consistently successful, or at least the best thing in town, there is no way students will attend games with admission fees.

Edited August 25, 2015 by James

[Censored by Laurie]

I really hope we aren't giving 19 and 20 year olds a 4k check. I hope someone is smart enough to realize this needs to be given in installment payments over the course of the Fall and Spring semester.

 

Otherwise it's like giving the money straight to Winstar.

which players do you think are going to head to the casino with their check? name names, please. 

[UNT90]

which players do you think are going to head to the casino with their check? name names, please. 

the point is 20 year olds have a good chance to be irresponsible with a large sum of money that they have never possessed before. Do you disagree? 

 

Or is that too much of a moral judgement for you.

[James]

the point is 20 year olds have a good chance to be irresponsible with a large sum of money that they have never possessed before. Do you disagree? 

 

Or is that too much of a moral judgement for you.

there's also thousands of other students on campus that receive financial aid refund checks much larger than that amount and spend it poorly. People will always find ways to screw things up. 

[Censored by Laurie]

the point is 20 year olds have a good chance to be irresponsible with a large sum of money that they have never possessed before. Do you disagree? 

 

just 20 year olds? I think anybody CAN be irresponsible with money, but no, I don't assume that most 20 year olds, especially those committed to a rather rigorous system like a college football team that sets high expectations for performance/academics/representation...can't maintain a budget, let alone that they'll go lay whatever cash they happen into on red and see what happens. 

but then, I'm much further from the program than you are and perhaps you know of some players with a gambling addiction. in hindsight, I was certainly wrong to ask for their names publicly...PM me and let's see what we can't find for help for these players...maybe a local GA program? 

unless of course it was just a baseless statement...

there's also thousands of other students on campus that receive financial aid refund checks much larger than that amount and spend it poorly. People will always find ways to screw things up. 

and I'd contend many more who view the aid as their means to an education and spend it appropriately

sure does feel like a number of you are projecting your own dumb-ass 20 year old selves onto every 20 year old out there. 

[Army of Dad]

just 20 year olds? I think anybody CAN be irresponsible with money, but no, I don't assume that most 20 year olds, especially those committed to a rather rigorous system like a college football team that sets high expectations for performance/academics/representation...can't maintain a budget, let alone that they'll go lay whatever cash they happen into on red and see what happens. 
but then, I'm much further from the program than you are and perhaps you know of some players with a gambling addiction. in hindsight, I was certainly wrong to ask for their names publicly...PM me and let's see what we can't find for help for these players...maybe a local GA program? 

unless of course it was just a baseless statement...

and I'd contend many more who view the aid as their means to an education and spend it appropriately

sure does feel like a number of you are projecting your own dumb-ass 20 year old selves onto every 20 year old out there. 

So regimented of a program that they would never be out after curfew, or waking out of Walmart without paying, or evading arrest/detention, or drinking and driving, right? 

Just because you know or knew very responsible 20 year olds then we can, according to your line of thinking, assign that same very responsible character to all 85 football players and the hundreds of other athletes that will be receiving COA payments.

[Censored by Laurie]

So regimented of a program that they would never be out after curfew, or waking out of Walmart without paying, or evading arrest/detention, or drinking and driving, right? 

Just because you know or knew very responsible 20 year olds then we can, according to your line of thinking, assign that same very responsible character to all 85 football players and the hundreds of other athletes that will be receiving COA payments.

JimJim, Ellis, Loving, Schelleci and Abbe(?)...five players...over a three year period...assume 20 or so scholarship players graduated...we're talking 125 scholarships.

5/125 = 4%. 

[oldguystudent]

I see now that the new argument is that young kids can't handle this kind of money, so we therefore shouldn't give them any.  We must micromanage their every move, their every meal, their every bowel movement.  And they should like it.

They're adults.  Treat them as such.  After all, we ARE all about letting individuals succeed or fail based solely on their own personal merit, yes?

[outoftown]

my phd in psychology quite agrees with those who say that not everybody has learnt how to deal with money, particularly those who never had any (and those who never had any limits to their money), because learning how to save and plan for how to spend it is a partially acquired skil. Generally people at all ages can be irresponsible with money, but most adolescents or kids just post-puberty who never had a regular income are in a partiuclar need to learn how to handle having regular finances. And since athletes can't really hold down a regular job, this is as close to that experience as they'll get.

Edited August 25, 2015 by outoftown

[Censored by Laurie]

my phd in psychology quite agrees with those who say that not everybody has learnt how to deal with money, particularly those who never had any, because learning how to save and plan for how to spend it is a partially acquired skil. Generally people at all ages can be irresponsible with money, but most adolescents or kids just post-puberty who never had a regular income are in a partiuclar need to learn how to handle having regular finances. And since athletes can't really hold down a regular job, this is as close to that experience as they'll get.

you sure we should trust you on how to spend money? 

 

I kid...advanced liberal arts degree high-five! 

[outoftown]

I see now that the new argument is that young kids can't handle this kind of money, so we therefore shouldn't give them any.  We must micromanage their every move, their every meal, their every bowel movement.  And they should like it.

They're adults.  Treat them as such.  After all, we ARE all about letting individuals succeed or fail based solely on their own personal merit, yes?

This is an unwinnable argument. So what will you do, when a boneheaded 18 year old freshmen pisses it all away at once on super cool gadgets, and then in febraury complains at an interview that he couldn't eat cause he had no money and the COA cheques had run out (but likely forgets what he spent it on, and how will we know)? Are you still gonna say now treat him as an adult and let him starve/collect wellfare/get foodstamps/whatever your prefered solution for adults is?

What is more: they are not earning it all at once but across their 2 semesters of effort, why should they get it all at once.

Edited August 25, 2015 by outoftown

[MeanGreenTexan]

I'm confused as to what we're arguing about.

Do we want to keep the COA stipends out of everyone's hands because we're worried some students may spend it irresponsibly?

What about the responsible ones, who would actually budget and spend on things they actually need? 

And, regarding discretionary spending, do these guys/gals not deserve to have a good time every once in a while?  Or, are they robots that only exist to study and entertain us with their athletic feats?

This is an unwinnable argument. So what will you do, when a boneheaded 18 year old freshmen pisses it all away at once on super cool gadgets, and then in febraury complains at an interview that he couldn't eat cause he had no money and the COA cheques had run out (but likely forgets what he spent it on, and how will we know)? Are you still gonna say now treat him as an adult and let him starve/collect wellfare/get foodstamps/whatever your prefered solution for adults is?

What is more: they are not earning it all at once but across their 2 semesters of effort, why should they get it all at once.

Do we know who actually cuts the checks?

Is it the University?  If so, I bet they get money per-semester.   If the COA money is dumped in the AD's coffers, maybe Rick can have the money divided on a per-month basis to help with accountability.  And, if he's smart, make money while he's holding the rest like a bank.