Knight Commission Database on Student Athlete Spending

[Stallion]

apparently the private schools like SMU didn't release information but this link takes you to a graph comparing average spending on student athletes v regular students. The issue that faces SMU is how do we come up with sufficient revenue to compete without BCS TV/Bowl revenue

http://spendingdatabase.knightcommissio ... _institu-1

[Stallion]

AAC info is unavailable due to conference changes but here is the CUSA graph which is somewhat analogous since so many teams are now AAC. Note biggest obvious difference is that Institutional funding for athletics increased over 100% while that number is flat for the broader FBS graph. Could be student athletic fees at some of these state institutions building on campus facilities-not sure

http://spendingdatabase.knightcommission.org/fbs/c-usa

[Pugilistic Pony]

All things considered, I would like to see SMU join these schools in the AAU rather than worry about (and spent stupid amounts of money on) our rankings in the AAC and/or the NCAA. But, that's just me.

Member Institutions and Years of Admission

Boston University (2012)
Brandeis University (1985)
Brown University (1933)
California Institute of Technology (1934)
Carnegie Mellon University (1982)
Case Western Reserve University (1969)
Columbia University (1900)
Cornell University (1900)
Duke University (1938)
Emory University (1995)
Georgia Institute of Technology (2010)
Harvard University (1900)
Indiana University (1909)
Iowa State University (1958)
The Johns Hopkins University (1900)
Massachusetts Institute of Technology (1934)
McGill University (1926)
Michigan State University (1964)
New York University (1950)
Northwestern University (1917)
The Ohio State University (1916)
The Pennsylvania State University (1958)
Princeton University (1900)
Purdue University (1958)
Rice University (1985)
Rutgers, The State University of New Jersey (1989)
Stanford University (1900)
Stony Brook University-State University of New York (2001)
Texas A&M University (2001)
Tulane University (1958)
The University of Arizona (1985)
University at Buffalo, The State University of New York (1989)
University of California, Berkeley (1900)
University of California, Davis (1996)
University of California, Irvine (1996)
University of California, Los Angeles (1974)
University of California, San Diego (1982)
University of California, Santa Barbara (1995)
The University of Chicago (1900)
University of Colorado Boulder (1966)
University of Florida (1985)
University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign (1908)
The University of Iowa (1909)
The University of Kansas (1909)
University of Maryland, College Park (1969)
University of Michigan (1900)
University of Minnesota, Twin Cities (1908)
University of Missouri-Columbia (1908)
The University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill (1922)
University of Oregon (1969)
University of Pennsylvania (1900)
University of Pittsburgh (1974)
University of Rochester (1941)
University of Southern California (1969)
The University of Texas at Austin (1929)
University of Toronto (1926)
University of Virginia (1904)
University of Washington (1950)
The University of Wisconsin-Madison (1900)
Vanderbilt University (1950)
Washington University in St. Louis (1923)
Yale University (1900)

[East Coast Mustang]

I could two [deleted] about being in the AAU. I want to see a nationally competitive football program

[ponyinNC]

It doesn't have to be an either / or.

Let's do both. Personally, I think increased exposure in athletics, especially football, leads to increased donations, increased applications and better overall academics. Which in turn could lead to AAU status if that money is invested in research.

My $0.02

[RebStang]

I could two [deleted] about being in the AAU. I want to see a nationally competitive football program

AAU membership is one of those things that is on the "would be nice" list for me... however, I look at a lot of the schools on there and wonder what the tradeoff is in terms of actual classroom experience for undergraduate students.

How many of those big research Universities have fundamental 1st and 2nd year engineering classes being taught by grad students because the tenured faculty are too concerned with research to show up and teach a lowly 1st or 2nd year engineering major? One of the things I loved about SMU was the fact that my freshman engineering and other classes were taught by actual PhD holding professors and not by bored grad students who were looking to plow through the syllabus as quickly as possible so that they could get back to prepping for their next dissertation committee meeting.

[Pugilistic Pony]

I guess it all boils down to with which institutions SMU would like to be considered a peer. Baylor, TCU, Wake Forest, etc., or Tulane, Rice, Duke, Vanderbilt, USC, Northwestern, etc.?

I really like college football, and I would very much like to see SMU prosper in that arena, but I am also mindful of the role and reputation of a university. While talking sports smack to work colleagues after a game is fun, leveraging a respected college degree for a good career is critical, IMO. The dog should wag the tail, and not the other way around.

[feelthehorsepower]

I could two [deleted] about being in the AAU. I want to see a nationally competitive football program

Being in the AAU would be one of the things a conference like the Big Ten considers before adding a program...just FYI

[MV pony]

SMU's real goal should be both.

[feelthehorsepower]

SMU's real goal should be both.

Yes, AAU membership and P5 membership! We have to excel in everything!

[ghost]

You know the old saying about stats and lies? So deceptive. That graph shows the spending. What I would like to see is the revenue generated line on the graph. I bet they are including the amount paid on the student includes facility upgrades and coaches salaries. I would like to see how much of that $100,0000 the student athlete actually gets. Prob just the increase in room and board and tuition while the schools get all that tv revenue!

[Pugilistic Pony]

You will get no argument from me on that stance.