Well ASU-Jonesboro announced their big stadium redo. As you can see from the link they told the Ark Times it will be funded by people paying for premium seating and naming opportunities. More than likely it will be funded by more fees on the students like they do now and taxpayer dollars also like they do now. If the UA did this the Dem-Gaz would have it on the front page and Wally would write about it forever, but they don’t ever mention that about ASU-Jonesboro .
Is this the college located in the same city as Jonesboro High School? What an honor for ASU, Jonesboro, AR.
I mean there are other ASU branches besides Jonesboro…right!!! Could be ASU - Beebe. Or ASU-Mountain Home.
Taxpayers & captive students will subsidize something the market would never allow to exist.
I get the point about taxpayers, but “captive” students is interesting. As far as I can tell know one is forced to go to ASU, Arkansas, or any other school for that matter. If one did his/her due diligence then they know ASU imposes student activity fees for athletics - if so and they choose to go to school there then I guess it’s not an issue. If they don’t due their due diligence and complain about the fee then I don’t have a lot of sympathy for them.
students can be captive in a couple of ways. First, those who are already enrolled when new fees are added can’t easily transfer. They’re not likely to so just because they’re screwed out of something like an extra $50 or even $150 per semester. The cost of the transfer exceeds the additional cost to subsidize athletics. Second, a whole lot of students at ASU live or grew up within 50 miles of campus. They’re there because the overall cost & convenience is less than it would be to go somewhere else, but they’re nonetheless screwed if the few dollars they spend go to something other than education. That’s particularly true for students who live at home & commute. The education is what they want & what they can afford, but they have to pay an unnecessary premium because their bargaining position is bad.
Suppose a student compares two schools. The education at school A is better but more expensive. The education at school B isn’t nearly as good, but is only somewhat cheaper because it wastes so much money on trying to be a big football power. It the student is barely scraping together enough to get the education so must choose school B out financial compulsion he’s essentially captured by the unnecessary fees.
Certainly one can argue no one is compelled to attend a school that wastes so many resources on athletics at the expense of academics as ASU clearly does, but that still ignores the fact that an individual’s education is important to society as a whole. We set up & fund colleges & universities to educate, we don’t need to soak students with exorbitant fees to satisfy the egos of a few people who want their school to be top 25 in football. It’s unfair to those students. The irony is that a non-student could attend every football & basketball game at a lower cost than ASU charges its own students in athletic fees.
Finally, I know that many students attend ASU on Pell grants. Those are taxpayer funded tuitions. I don’t know if Pell grants pay athletic fees, (I hope they don’t) but if they do, its even more outrageous to charge US taxpayers anything near what ASU charges for athletic fees.)
its athletic director(Terry Mohajir)apparently was asked about the expansion as compared to The University’s and told the Arkansas Democrat-Gazette,Little Rock that"Anybody can create more seats"Mohajir said.“It’s about creating more areas to entice new generations of fans.”…sounds like he doesn’t like any comparison to The University in anything that ASU,Jonesboro does…too bad that the school thinks they’re the big dog in the state.
Why is that “too bad”?
So does Harding.
So does Arkansas Tech.
So does Rich Mountain Community College.
uh, no they don’t
Lots of schools around the country charge student activity fees to support athletics. I would bet that most if not all schools in the Sunbelt Conference do that. Schools at that level (D1 mid-major) don’t have the revenue sources to fund comprehensive athletic programs absent that. Those schools need that to fund all of their sports, not just football. I suspect if they dropped all non-revenue sports, they could much closer to balancing their budget without activity fees. I think ASU has always diverted some general school revenues into the athletic program as well (lots of schools do that too). Expecting ASU to be like UAF is unrealistic. Louisiana has three schools just like ASU (ULM, ULL, and LaTech). TN has Chattanooga.
It’s true many schools use student fees, but I doubt many schools’ are as high as ASU’s–$18/sem hour as I recall. That’s $540/year to a student carrying 15 hours per semester. Schools like ULM, ULL, etc are just as guilty of raping their students as ASU.
However, you make one erroneous presumption about ASU and “revenue sports.” I haven’t looked in a while, but the last time I checked the biggest net money loser at ASU (& UCA for that matter) was football. Most schools make money on football or even basketball & the revenues from those sports support the entire athletic dept. Other funds make up the deficit football can’t fill. If ASU dropped football altogether the school would save about $6M/year. At least that was true about 3 years ago.
Recently ASU has changed the way its way of reporting revenues & expenses. (The US Dept of Ed shows it on its website). It only took a few easy calculations to figure their football ticket sales were about $400k. Another $800k or so came from playing out of state major teams.
Now, they have a huge “other revenue” category. That makes it impossible without an audit to know the exact sources or numbers. However, it’s awfully strange that now football’s revenues exactly match its expenses–to the penny.
:roll: Just SMH.
The stadium expansion was on the front page of Friday’s sports section.
I think he’s talking about the scandalous way it’ll be funded, Richard, not the fact of the plan itself.
Thanks. It’s my fault.
I have to understand the ADG is out to get the UA and also the UA never does any wrong.
It’s like I love my country, which I do, but the USA should never be questioned.
I don’t adhere to the view that the ADG is out to get the UA. I’m certain it isn’t. However, I also think the ADG panders. I’m confident it’s pandering to either UALR, ASU or both with this “UAF” obsession. I also suspect it’s either pandering to ASU or afraid it’ll be seen as too "pro-UA’ if it exposes or focuses on the outrageous waste of tax & student funds to support its football program. Given how underfunded higher education is in this state & how tuitions have soared, it’s despicable what they spend to try to compete “at the highest level” of D1 football. There are thousands of colleges in this country & only some 65-70 can compete at that level. Those don’t do it by sucking tax money.
Wally’s original schtick when he first became sports editor was to “tell it like it is”–a poorly disguised attempt to criticize the UA athletic dept when many people perceived the Gazette as its great defender. Wally constantly promoted UALR basketball & Mike Newell & along with J.R. Starr were quick & often very unfair with their criticisms of Broyles, Nolan, Holtz, Hatfield. Wally also promoted the idea taht we should play ASU. If it wasn’t pandering, it sure had that look. Much of that began to change with the merger, but that’s the history. I don’t believe Wally is anti-UA or particularly pro-ASU or UALR, but I think he believes he gets bonus points for credibility when pushes for them or offers spurious reasons for this silly “UAF” policy.
I’d love to see the ADG (and the Ark Times for that matter) let the state simply know how much ASU (and even UCA) are diverting into their athletic depts.
Being a state-wide paper, you should report or mention other schools. Not sure why it’s a big deal for Wally to talk about UALR or ASU.
I’m pretty sure the paper has reported UALR and ASU has subsidized the athletic programs. Not athletics, but the paper exposed wrongdoing by UCA (Hardin and others). The paper also exposed ASU Chancellor Tim Hudson’s wife.
Hudson’s wife, Deidra Hudson, resigned last month from her part-time position as the ASU study-abroad director after an internal audit revealed problems with organization, instructor contracts and pay methods for overseas trips, the Arkansas Democrat-Gazette previously reported.
Never said the paper shouldn’t report on those schools. Never said the paper had never reported on scandals involving them. Both the examples you cite, however, had more to do with individuals violating their fiduciary duties to the schools, not systemic abuses by the schools themselves. The ASU athletic funding is a problem that’s existed for years & never been properly exposed.
The only place I read about ASU funding was in the ADG. It obviously might have been reported elsewhere.
I’ve always considered the college in Bebe to be THE ARKANSAS STATE UNIVERSITY.