Class of 2021 - Predictions for June 15?

[Unregistered]

Forgot to add, and by fully funding, I mean add a few more fully funded scholarships to the women's soccer teams (18-20).

The economic reality is that many D1 and D2 schools cannot fully fund their current 14 or 9.9 respective full scholarships. I’ve read that the number that can’t may be as high as 30% of those schools. Forget about expanding the number of scholarships. The NCAA women’s sports study from 2014 below shows this pretty clearly. For example, you have the average D1 soccer program generating $36,000 in revenue and $666,000 in expenses. And those probably are direct expenses (salaries, scholarships, equipment, travel). Indirect expense like fields and maintenance are probably a different budget line, but would probably bump expenses over $1 million. It also shows $340k total on average available for those 14 scholarships, which works out to around $25k per scholarship, which would hardly cover tuition at most schools let alone room and board, books, etc. And we all know that most coaches are spreading those scholarships over their 25+ player rosters so the average is far less.

https://www.ncaa.org/sites/default/files/NCAA-WSI.pdf

[Unregistered]

The economic reality is that many D1 and D2 schools cannot fully fund their current 14 or 9.9 respective full scholarships. I’ve read that the number that can’t may be as high as 30% of those schools. Forget about expanding the number of scholarships. The NCAA women’s sports study from 2014 below shows this pretty clearly. For example, you have the average D1 soccer program generating $36,000 in revenue and $666,000 in expenses. And those probably are direct expenses (salaries, scholarships, equipment, travel). Indirect expense like fields and maintenance are probably a different budget line, but would probably bump expenses over $1 million. It also shows $340k total on average available for those 14 scholarships, which works out to around $25k per scholarship, which would hardly cover tuition at most schools let alone room and board, books, etc. And we all know that most coaches are spreading those scholarships over their 25+ player rosters so the average is far less.

https://www.ncaa.org/sites/default/files/NCAA-WSI.pdf

Or the scholarships given out in other sports as well. True. But, that's why the capital campaigns raise so much money from alum and current participants/families. Athletes (and their families) tend to give back. So, it's an investment of sorts.

[Unregistered]

Two of mine got 80%. Guess we just must be lucky.

No, you weren't lucky. You were very smart. You must have 2 kids that are good players, or even great players. You were smart enough to send them to schools where they were going to be much more talented than their teammates. From the schools' perspectives, your kids were good "gets." Congrats. Most parents and players make the mistake of aiming for the highest level that will take them (e.g., ACC, Big10, etc.), where the kid ends up simply being one of 25-30 kids and not special enough to capture the big $'s. Well played.

[Unregistered]

He just humble-bragged and you bit. :)

If the story is even true, he's humble bragging about sending his kids to Butthead State and Tappa Keg U. He's not paying much now, but he will be when they move back home post-grad and start coaching JV soccer at the local middle school...

[Unregistered]

The economic reality is that many D1 and D2 schools cannot fully fund their current 14 or 9.9 respective full scholarships. I’ve read that the number that can’t may be as high as 30% of those schools. Forget about expanding the number of scholarships. The NCAA women’s sports study from 2014 below shows this pretty clearly. For example, you have the average D1 soccer program generating $36,000 in revenue and $666,000 in expenses. And those probably are direct expenses (salaries, scholarships, equipment, travel). Indirect expense like fields and maintenance are probably a different budget line, but would probably bump expenses over $1 million. It also shows $340k total on average available for those 14 scholarships, which works out to around $25k per scholarship, which would hardly cover tuition at most schools let alone room and board, books, etc. And we all know that most coaches are spreading those scholarships over their 25+ player rosters so the average is far less.

https://www.ncaa.org/sites/default/files/NCAA-WSI.pdf

Good points. The other factor - which may not affect too many people on this forum yet - is the health and success of the revenue generating sports. When schools drop football or men's basketball there's a potentially massive domino effect on the other sports. A D1 school without a football team no longer needs to offer many of the women's sports that are driven by Title IX compliance. If the day comes when paying players or insuring football teams becomes too expensive for many of the D1 schools, watch the fallout that occurs in sports like women's soccer. Fully funded programs will be extremely scarce.

[Unregistered]

Or the scholarships given out in other sports as well. True. But, that's why the capital campaigns raise so much money from alum and current participants/families. Athletes (and their families) tend to give back. So, it's an investment of sorts.

That is true but there are also lots of grumbling about the cost of athletics in the day and age high tuition. Many full paying students feel like they're the ones paying for it and in some ways they are. Some schools are slowly cutting programs or the number of scholarships. At some schools it just doesn't make financial sense.

[Unregistered]

That is true but there are also lots of grumbling about the cost of athletics in the day and age high tuition. Many full paying students feel like they're the ones paying for it and in some ways they are. Some schools are slowly cutting programs or the number of scholarships. At some schools it just doesn't make financial sense.

True. But it's also marketing (athletics) to bring in students from far and wide including those that full pay. Investing the capital campaign contributions from the athletic alums and their families/relatives goes a long way and may also contribute to the scholarships/grants received by some of the grumbling full pay students who may not be giving back as alum.

[Unregistered]

If the story is even true, he's humble bragging about sending his kids to Butthead State and Tappa Keg U. He's not paying much now, but he will be when they move back home post-grad and start coaching JV soccer at the local middle school...

That's some palpable bitterness ya got there.

[Unregistered]

That's some palpable bitterness ya got there.

It’s healthy skepticism. People here live in a fantasy world.

[Unregistered]

If you haven’t noticed, some colleges and programs are folding. They’re not sustainable. Expect to see more of this, and it will certainly affect athletics and scholarships.

[Unregistered]

The economic reality is that many D1 and D2 schools cannot fully fund their current 14 or 9.9 respective full scholarships. I’ve read that the number that can’t may be as high as 30% of those schools. Forget about expanding the number of scholarships. The NCAA women’s sports study from 2014 below shows this pretty clearly. For example, you have the average D1 soccer program generating $36,000 in revenue and $666,000 in expenses. And those probably are direct expenses (salaries, scholarships, equipment, travel). Indirect expense like fields and maintenance are probably a different budget line, but would probably bump expenses over $1 million. It also shows $340k total on average available for those 14 scholarships, which works out to around $25k per scholarship, which would hardly cover tuition at most schools let alone room and board, books, etc. And we all know that most coaches are spreading those scholarships over their 25+ player rosters so the average is far less.

https://www.ncaa.org/sites/default/files/NCAA-WSI.pdf

The scholarship numbers in that report clearly are averages. I may be be off a bit but I believe that there are almost twice as many state schools in D1 which will significantly bring down that number in the end column since most tuitions at state schools are a 1/3 of what a private institution in the Northeast now fetches. The important number is the roster count. That is intended to tell you how many kids are getting money. It’s actually a much bigger number than is being reported here.

[Unregistered]

Interesting point. Take the $343k and divide it by the 22 players and you come up with an average scholarship of roughy $16k. Full in cost of UMass is what $28k. That’s almost 60% which is better than the 50% that always gets thrown around here.

[Unregistered]

No, you weren't lucky. You were very smart. You must have 2 kids that are good players, or even great players. You were smart enough to send them to schools where they were going to be much more talented than their teammates. From the schools' perspectives, your kids were good "gets." Congrats. Most parents and players make the mistake of aiming for the highest level that will take them (e.g., ACC, Big10, etc.), where the kid ends up simply being one of 25-30 kids and not special enough to capture the big $'s. Well played.

Isn’t finding a place where your kid can be successful and happy the goal? Isn’t that what the targeting advice is really aimed at producing. Funny is smart one becomes when you don’t follow the lemmings off the cliff.

[Unregistered]

A more interesting report is this one

https://www.ncaa.org/sites/default/f...d_20180119.pdf

Almost half of D1 has enrollment over 10k. Clearly those are state schools. Then when you have public schools like Deleware St with an enrollment of around 4,800 you have to think that around half of that next band down are also probably state schools it really underscores the point that you can’t look at that other report as a definitive source explaining how much scholarship money is out there.

[Unregistered]

Never mind all that did you see that 77% of D3 schools have an enrollment of under 3,000. Not everyone is interested in that small an environment.