<p>^^ I agree, that is the underlying problem that should be addressed. It isn’t about paying vs scholarships, but about how we should get our priorities right from an academic standpoint when it comes to the main reason one attends college.</p>
<p>The vast majority who play college sports never go on to make their living as an athlete. If they also never got any kind of meaningful degre…now what???</p>
<p>The GFG: “For example, athletes are expected to host recruits, which is a time-consuming activity. Also, even though the host is given money to use to take their recruit to dinner or wherever, the other teammates who join them (as they are expected to do when they can, and when it makes sense) have to use their own money for that trip to the ice cream or pizza shop.”</p>
<p>I feel for you & your daughter, GFG and agree that the above is unfair. I can tell you at my kid’s D1 the coach emails the team prior to OVs and asks who can/not host. And don’t NCAA rules restrict what can be spent on a recruit during an OV? Never heard of team members having to pony up. When my kid went through official visits, all the schools were very clear on $ restrictions. One school issued paper tickets coded to the sport for kid’s meals on campus (in dining halls eaten with team members, good way to assess school’s cafs) during the visit. Another had the reknowned coach having all the recruits on that visit to the coach’s home for a home-cooked meal with the team. Nice touch and confirmed the strength of the team’s good relationship with their coaches.</p>
<p>I also agree it must be rough for your daughter to hold down her work-study job tied in with her aid. If I may point out something for recruited athletes to consider, it’s that in Division I if the student is accepting an ATHLETIC scholarship only (as opposed to need-based) the NCAA prohibits work-study as part of the package. Just something to consider. My kid accepted a partial athletic scholarship knowing this and chose to work more hours over breaks. However, if an athlete gets a job not tied in with aid or off campus, I don’t see how the NCAA can protest.</p>
<p>IMHO the current system which was put in place to try to prevent the abuses back in the day which had athletes ditching entire semesters of class and driving sports cars of suspicious origin makes sense. While there may be some wiggle room, our experience has been that top tier schools enforce the academic index and certain admission standards.</p>
<p>Yes, my daughter was given the option of a very small athletic scholarship at her school, or a good financial aid package. Naturally, she chose the latter and that is why she can be expected to have job as well. She is ecstatically happy there and none of what I am writing about bothers her much. But as her financially strapped parents who are struggling to pay the college bills, any additional expenses do indeed concern US. I understand that for most people at her elite school, these small expenditures would be a total non-issue but we aren’t like those people. </p>
<p>Her school is very, very careful to abide by NCAA regulations for recruits, so they are definitely not over-spending on them. It’s just that if the hostess decides to take her visiting recruit into town to get ice cream or see a movie or whatever, and wants my D and other teammates to come along (which is best for helping the recruit get to know the team), the recruiting budget doesn’t pay for my D. It pays for the hostess and the recruit. If this were an ordinary outing that D wanted to go to but didn’t have money, she would politely decline. But in this case she feels an obligation to support the team and help her teammate do a good job hosting–just as she’ll want them to accompany her when she hosts a recruit.</p>
<p>Another unfair expense in my opinion, is that if kids are red-shirted for developmental reasons (ie. not injury), when they compete unattached they have to pay for their own meet entry fees and for transportation to the meets. The school can’t pay for that even though they could afford it and would want to do so, since NCAA rules don’t allow it. If the school pays, the kids would then be counted as on the roster and not redshirted. I get the rationale, but our D is left footing the bill when her wealthy institution would willingly pay if they were permitted.</p>
<p>Your posts are always informative and you raise another good point about red-shirting. We had been told that since this scholarship is an athletic one it would not be lost if an injury necessitated red-shirting. But I’ll have to ask my kid if that would mean that I have to pay fees for meets attended in this condition if this situation were to happen. You also made me remember one OV at a great school which is synonymous with the kid’s sport and has big revenues from other sports. The coach said they often red-shirt freshmen and asked me if I would mind driving a bunch of them when The Big Event rolled around! This is not why my kid turned this school down, but we did shake our heads privately wondering why Massive Sports Budget U couldn’t rasssle up a minivan for this endeavour. I guess like you said it would break NCAA rules.</p>